

THE 


AMKk 


JJ1 


1 

J 


AN'S TEXT-BOOK: 


V\ 


BEING 


A SERIES OF LETTERS, 


ADDRESSED BY 


“AN AMERICAN,” 


TO THE CITIZENS OF TENNESSEE, 


In exposition and vindication op the Principles and Policy 


of thb American Party. 



NASHVILLE: 

PUBLISHED BY ORDER OF THE OFFICIAL BOARD OF THE S. C. OF TENN 

1855. 



























f. 


V 







'$i. 4 ’' 




INTRODUCTORY. 


NUMBER 1. 

Fellow-Citizens of the State of Tennessee: 

I propose addressing you a series of articles in 
exposition and vindication of the principles and policy of 
our organization in this State, commonly denominated “The 
Know Nothings .” 

The selection of the Nashville True Whig, as our medium 
of communication, is one purely of personal choice; for, as 
yet, the Know Nothing organization has not invested any 
public journal in this State with the prerogative to speak 
authoritatively for it, upon any question of principle or policy. 

As our organization is composed of Whigs and Democrats 
indiscriminately, therefore, in our admissions to membership, 
or selections for office, we recognize no man’s eligibility to 
either from any antecedent relation he may have sustained to 
either of the old political parties, Whig or Democrat. We 
will oppose those who oppose us. We will sustain those 
only who sustain us, be they Whigs or Democrats. We will 
select from among ourselves alone, gentlemen of worth and 
ability, who will faithfully represent our principles and pol¬ 
icy, for all offices; especially for both branches of our Legis¬ 
lature, for Congress, and the Gubernatorial Chair of State, 
and this we will do through our various conventions, county, 



4 


Congressional and State, irrespective of any or all other 
conventions. 

Our organization being unique, distinct from all others in 
some of its ends, aims and principles, we are determined 
that it shall remain independent of all others, reposing alone 
for its ultimate triumph, upon its own firm basis, the native 
pulsations of the great American heart. Hence our motto: 
At home or abroad , in peace or in war , Native Americans alone 
shall sit in our watch-towers of State or in our council cham¬ 
bers , to preside over the destinies of America. 

Let me assure you, fellow-citizens, that nothing, save the 
overwhelming importance of the questions involved in our 
organization, could have lured me, in my old age, from the 
tranquil felicities of private life, to enter the arena of an 
exciting public discussion. The glorious Revolution of ’76 
gave birth to our American constitutional liberty. The no 
less glorious revolution through which we are passing, by 
means of our principles , will perpetuate that constitutional 
liberty to our children forever. The greatest glory of a 
freeborn people should be to transmit their freedom unim¬ 
paired, to their children. 

We would esteem ourselves much flattered if the press in 
the State, favorable to the objects and principles of our or¬ 
ganization, would copy our articles as they appear. They 
shall be written in language simple, in tone and sentiment 
courteous and dignified, with all the attainments and ability 
we possess. In our subsequent articles we will define and 
defend our platform. Yours, I am 

AN AMERICAN. 


5 


NO. II. 

The American party composed indiscriminately of Whigs and Democrats 
—Nominations for office, how made—Proposed repeal or modification oj 
the Naturalization laws—Constitutional provisions hearing on the ques¬ 
tion—Proposed prohibition of foreign-born citizens from holding office , 
and considerations in favor of it, drawn from the history of other na¬ 
tions. 

Gentlemen: 

In our first communication we observed that the 
Know Nothing organization was indiscriminately composed 
of Whigs and Democrats ; that as a party we sustained and 
opposed those only who sustained or opposed us, and that 
our selections for all offices were determined by our County, 
Congressional, State and National Conventions. We also 
observed, that in this and subsequent articles, we would 
present you with a faithful expose of our principles and pol¬ 
icy, and attempt their vindication to the utmost of our ability. 
In the prosecution of our undertaking, should we provoke a 
newspaper discussion, let us studiously avoid all scurrility 
of language, all asperity of manner. Let us exhibit an 
agreeableness of good nature, which is often the genial air 
of a good mind, of a generous soul, and the prolific soil in 
which truth and virtue best prosper. 

First. We advocate a repeal of our laws of naturalization 
by Congress, or such a modification of them as to require of 
all future imigrants a residence in our country of at least 
twenty-one years after they have taken the oath of allegiance 
to the United States, and renounced the same to every other 
potentate or power, whether temporal or ecclesiastical. 

If our naturalization laws were repealed, then in the future 
no foreigner could be eligible to a seat in the House of Re¬ 
presentatives, or the Senate of the United States; because 
the constitution declares that he must be a citizen at least 
seven years before he can be eligible to a seat in the former, 
or nine years before eligible to a seat in the latter House. 
Consequently, a repeal of these laws would divest him of 
the requisite citizenship to make him eligible to a seat in 
either branch of our National Legislature. Again, he would 
not be such a citizen in the contemplation of the constitution, 
as would render it obligatory upon each State to invest him 
with all the “rights, privileges and immunities of the citi¬ 
zens of the several States.” See sec. 2, art. 4., of the con¬ 
stitution. Thus, it would result, that no State, by illegally 
or prematurely naturalizing foreigners, could send them into 
other States to change their peculiar institutions ; or would 
organize immigrant associations to send them into our West¬ 
ern Territories, as was done in Kansas and Nebraska, to en- 


6 


graft upon their institutions sectional animosities or peculiar 
political tenets. 

Again, we advocate the enactment of a law by Congress, 
prohibiting the President of the United States by and with 
the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint persons of 
foreign birth, to be our Ministers, Ambassadors, Consuls, or 
Charges d’Affaires abroad, or Judges of the Supreme or 
Federal Courts, or to employ them as heads, clerks, or other 
officials in any of the departments of the General Govern¬ 
ment, as they have been by hundreds and thousands. Thus, 
we would have no foreigners by birth prostituting their high 
official position and duties to vile purposes of personal pique 
and gratification, or to the more ignoble purposes of enhanc¬ 
ing the world-fortune of private Stock-Jobbers and National 
Bond-Shavers, such as the Rothschilds. If the naturaliza¬ 
tion laws were repealed, and this law by Congress enacted, 
then, from the President to the least official employed in the 
General Government, or in any of its departments, whether 
at home or abroad, in the civil or military corps—all would 
be native Americans. Might we not congratulate ourselves 
in the future, and repose in security, when we knew “that 
none but Americans were on guard”—presiding over the 
destinies of America. 

If these laws were not repealed, but modified in such 
manner as we designate, we would still accomplish many of 
the great national objects for which our mysterious associa¬ 
tion was organized. It would require 21 years residence, 
after the ceremonial of naturalization, before any foreigner 
could be invested with the rights and immunities of a citizen. 
If, therefore, he were 21 years of age when he took the oath 
of allegiance and abjuration, he would be 42 years of age 
before he could clothe himself in the Toga Virilis of an 
American citizen. Perhaps, if ever, he would then appre¬ 
ciate American constitutional liberty — the spirit and genius 
of our people and institutions. 

Citizens of the State of Tennessee, we will submit to you 
some of our reasons why no foreigner by birth should exer¬ 
cise the sacred privilege of the elective franchise, or be per¬ 
mitted to hold any office in the States or under the Federal 
Government. There is not another civilized nation on the 
globe—not one in Europe—that permits any foreigner to 
participate in its national legislation—to represent it in any 
diplomatic and ministerial capacity, or preside over any of 
its departments of State. Does England, France, Prussia, 
Austria, Russia, Spain, Holland, Norway, or Sweden ? No, 
not one. Why have China and Japan, England and Russia, 
preserved unimpaired for ages, their peculiar institutions, 
amid the ever changing tides of time ? Because they have 


7 


erected adamantine barriers against the revolutionary influ¬ 
ence and aggressions of foreigners. China and Japan have 
heretofore prohibited any foreigner, under the penalty of 
death, from ingress into the interior of their empires. Eng¬ 
land and Russia have rarely permitted them to hold any 
office in the legislative, judicial or administrative depart¬ 
ments. Besides, no foreigner is permitted to pass through 
their domains without an omnipresent police ever dogging 
his heels. When the British Parliament confers the rights 
of a native born subject upon a foreigner, it is only when he 
is connected by marriage with the royal family, and even 
then it requires a double act of legislation. 

Let us recur briefly, for further light upon this subject, to 
the policy of the wisest and most potent of ancient common¬ 
wealths. How was it that the Greeks preserved so long 
their language and laws; their genius and liberty, amid the 
thiek gathering darkness of surrounding natural ignorance 
and barbarism ? Because, to be a Greek citizen was the 
most distinguished honor that could be aspired to by prince 
or potentate—because no foreigner, upon pain of death, 
could even intrude his voice in their deliberative or legisla¬ 
tive assemblies. But, alas! the national splendor and liber¬ 
ties of these renowned republics faded away like a vision of 
night, when their offices of honor and trust—their popular 
and national assemblies—were thrown open to foreigners. 
’Twas then, that Philip of Macedon, through his seat in 
the Amphyctionic Council, extinguished the last glimmering 
trace of a once glorious nationality. Romans, too, were 
no less jealous of the jus civitatus —the rights of the citizen. 
W T hen was it Rome was almighty called, and the shadow of 
her haughty power encircled the globe ? Twas when I am 
a Roman citizen , would have stood alone against a world in 
arms. For Gibbon tells us that when the Emperor Cara- 
calla, for purposes of a more extended taxation, levelled all 
distinctions, and communicated the rights of the citizen to 
the whole empire indiscriminately, the national spirit be¬ 
came extinct among the people, and the pride and honor of 
their country were sunk forever. Yes, it was foreign influ¬ 
ence that trailed her eagle banners in the dust—that hushed 
the voice of her Tullys, and made Rome the “ Niobe of Na¬ 
tions.” 

Citizens of the State of Tennessee ! thus you see that the 
putrid despotisms of the Old World—that the oppressive 
monarchies ot the New, have preserved their empires, for 
ages, alone by excluding foreigners from their offices of 
State, and guarding with an eternal vigilance their elective 
franchise and institutions from their unhallowed influence. 
How, therefore, can we preserve our most delicate and 


8 


beautiful flower of constitutional liberty, against the with¬ 
ering blight of foreign influence, unless we too, like them, 
shall guard our elective franchise and offices of State with 
the same aegis of protection—the same invulnerable ram¬ 
parts ? Permit your shores to be continually deluged by the 
ignorant and pauper emigration of Europe—their abusive 
exercise of your elective franchise—their occupancy of your 
high offices of honor—and not long shall, I am an American 
citizen , raise a throb in every heart that loves liberty, and 
force a reluctant tribute even from the most despotic op¬ 
pressor. 

The same argument continued in our next. I am 

AN AMERICAN. 


NO. Ill. 

The same subject continued , t cith reference to the Constitutional points 
involved—Opinions of Washing ton, Ooverneur Morris, and Elbrxdge 
Gerry. 

Gentlemen: —We promised in our last article to devote 
this to a further consideration of a repeal of the naturaliza¬ 
tion laws, or such a modification of them as to require of 
all aliens, in future, a residence of twenty-one years after 
they have taken the oaths of allegiance and abjuration, 
before they shall be invested with all the rights and immu¬ 
nities of native-born citizens. 

Were Congress to re per l its present laws, the power to 
naturalize foreigners, would revert to the States respective¬ 
ly, that possessed and exercised it exclusively anterior to the 
adoption of the Constitution. And if the States did not also 
repeal all their laws permitting foreigners by birth to exer¬ 
cise the elective franchise or to hold office within their sev¬ 
eral jurisdictions, or did not pass uniform laws upon these 
points, the greatest embarrassments might ensue from their 
repugnance and disparity. For the constitution expressly 
declares that the “ citizens of each State shall be entitled to 
all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several 
States.” Therefore, if the present uniform naturalization 
laws of Congress were repealed, and the States exercising 
this power did not enact'general uniform laws, it would fol¬ 
low that one State or a class of States, by incorporating 
aliens into their own citizenship, might force them as citi¬ 
zens upon other States, contrary to their own laws, policy 
or institutions. Indeed, it would render the laws of one. 
State paramount to those of all others, even within their 



9 


own jurisdiction. If aliens, indiscriminately, were admit¬ 
ted to enjoy all the rights of citizens at the option of any 
one State, the Union itself might be seriously imperiled by 
a sudden influx of foreigners hostile to its institutions, igno¬ 
rant of its powers, and incapable of appreciating its privi¬ 
leges. Hence, whether this power is exercised by the Fed¬ 
eral Government or by the States, the naturalization laws, 
to avoid all difficulty, must be uniform in their complexion 
and application. 

There are two constitutional points involved in this dis¬ 
cussion, that deserve a further consideration. 

First. That, though Congress has the power to “ establish 
a uniform rule of naturalization,” it has none to establish 
any law prescribing the qualifications which the electors of 
the several States must have to enable them to vote in any 
election, or to hold any office within the jurisdiction of the 
States. The power to define the qualifications of their own 
electors or office-holders, has ever resided in the several 
States, whether under the old or new form of government. 
If Congress possessed this power, it might impose some pro¬ 
perty , abolition , political or sectional test or qualification, that 
would be violative of the municipal regulations and institu¬ 
tions of the several States. Indeed, the General Govern¬ 
ment could not exercise this power without a most danger¬ 
ous usurpation of the rights of the States. It would anni¬ 
hilate all State power and influence. 

Again, this clause: “The citizens of each State shall 
be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of the citi¬ 
zens of the several States,” does not mean that any one State 
can prescribe rights and qualifications for the citizens or 
electors of any other State, in contravention of the local laws 
and policy of that other State. The privileges and immu¬ 
nities to which this clause refers, are of a fundamental 
character—such as the protection of life and liberty, to ac¬ 
quire and enjoy property, to pass through or reside in the 
State at pleasure, to pay no higher impositions than other 
citizens, to exercise the elective franchise, and to hold office 
according to the local regulations of each State. The adju¬ 
dications of the Supreme Court, and the concurrent opinions 
of Judges Story and Kent, sustain these positions. 

Therefore, whether the naturalization laws of Congress 
are repealed or modified as we desire, or not, still each State 
can prescribe its own qualifications or terms by which not 
only its own citizens, but those of any other State coming 
within its jurisdiction, shall hold office, or exercise the elec¬ 
tive franchise. Accordingly, you find in sec. 1, art. 4, of 
your State constitution, the following: “Every free white 
man of the age of 21 years, being a citizen of the United 


10 


States , and a citizen of the county wherein he may offer his 
vote, six months next preceding the day of the election, shall 
be entitled to vote for members of the General Assembly, 
and other civil officers for the county or district in which he 
resides.’ The legislature of our State has passed laws in 
pursuance of, and in accordance with this section of our 
State constitution. Thus, gentlemen of the Know Nothing 
party, if we mean to reduce our principles to practical utility, 
(and assuredly we do,) we must commence by changing our 
State constitution so as to preclude all future naturalized 
foreigners from either holding office or exercising the elec¬ 
tive franchise within the jurisdiction of our State. We must 
not vote for any member of our next Legislature who is not 
in favor of this change of the constitution, and the enact¬ 
ment of laws accordingly. Without this change of our con¬ 
stitution, how can we prevent legally and constitutionally, 
any foreigner who is a naturalized citizen of the United 
States, of the age of 21 years, and having resided within 
some county six months preceding any election, from voting 
in that election ? If such a naturalized citizen has resided 
in the State three years, and one year in the county, and is 
of the age of 21 years, he can be a representative in your 
legislature ; and if of the age of thirty years, he is eligible 
to the senate ; and if a citizen seven years, he is eligible to 
your Gubernatorial Chair of State. We can, at the next 
sitting of our Legislature, enact a law—and it should be 
done—that no foreigner, by birth, shall ever be eligible to 
the office of Secretary of State, Comptroller, or Treasurer, 
or Judge of the Supreme or Circuit, or Criminal Court of 
this State, or any other office within the gift of the people 
or the Legislature of the State, not (as this would not be) in 
contravention of the constitution of the State. This we 
must do, or be justly subject to the imputation of political 
humbuggery and hypocrisy. 

A latitudinarian extension of the right of suffrage to nat¬ 
uralized citizens, and in some cases even to aliens, is rapidly 
destroying every constitutional check, every conservative 
element intended by the sages who framed the earliest 
American constitutions, as safeguards against the abuses of 
popular suffrage. This is peculiarly the case with those 
States formed out of the North-western Territory, under the 
ordinance of the Confederated Congress of 1787. In Illinois, 
an alien who has been a bona fide resident of the State for 
six months, can vote in any election. Similar provisions 
exists in the constitutions of Wisconsin and Michigan. Ohio, 
by an act of her Legislature, passed in 1831, has restricted 
the right of suffrage to natural born and naturalized citizens. 
It is our paramount obligation and duty, gentlemen of the 


11 


Know Nothing party, to check forever this dangerous and 
licentious exercise of the elective franchise. And should 
not the American people do so ? 

We will now submit to you, Tennesseans, the solemn 
reflections of some of the wisest and best men that ever 
influenced the councils of our nation, or presided over its 
destinies — men who transmitted to their countrymen the 
rich legacies of unsullied reputations of an immaculate 
patriotism — a love of liberty that no presentation of peril 
or death could extinguish. We will commence with those 
of the illustrious Washington — the patriot without a par¬ 
allel ; a Christian whose God and his country, were the only 
objects of his supreme adoration. 

The following is from Gen. Washington’s letter to Gover- 
neur Morris, of Pennsylvania, dated July 24, 1788: 

“ Dear Sir: The design of this letter is to touch cursorily 
upon a subject of very great importance to the well-being of 
these States; much more so than will appear at first view. 

I mean the appointment of so many foreigners to offices of 
high rank and trust in our service. * * * Baron 

Steuben is also wanting to quit his inspectorship lor a com¬ 
mand in the line. This will be productive of much discon¬ 
tent to the Brigadiers. In a word, although I think the Baron 
an excellent officer, I do most devoutly wish that we had, not 
a single foreigner amongst us except the Marquis de Lafayette , 
who acts upon very different principles from those which 
govern the rest ” 

Again in his Farewell Address he uses this oracular 
admonition: 

“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence, I con¬ 
jure you to believe me, fellow-citizens, the jealousy of a 
free people ought to be constantly awake ; since history and 
experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most 
baneful foes of republican government.” 

This Mr. Morris was a delegate from Pennsylvania to the 
convention which framed our constitution, and when it was 
proposed in convention to make foreigners by birth eligible 
to a seat in Congress, he used the following language, doubt¬ 
less the sentiments of Washington himself, for Washington 
was his friend ; 

“The lesson we are taught is, that we should be governed 
as much by our reason, and as little by our feelings, as pos¬ 
sible. What is the language of reason upon this subject ? 
That we should not be polite at the expense of prudence. 
* * * He ran over the privileges which emigrants 

would enjoy among us, though they should be deprived of 
that of being eligible to the great offices of government; 
observing that they exceeded the privileges allowed to for- 


12 


• 

eigners in any other part of the globe. * * * 

Admit a Frenchman in your Senate, and he will study to 
increase the commerce of France ; an Englishman, and he 
will feel an equal bias in favor of that of England. It has 
been said that the State Legislatures will not choose for¬ 
eigners, at least not improper ones* There was no knowing 
what the Legislatures would do. Some appointments made 
by them proved that every thing ought to be apprehended 
from the cabals practiced on such occasions. He then men¬ 
tioned the case of a f oreigner who left this State in disgrace, 
and worked himself into an appointment from another to 
Congress.” 

Elbridge Gerry, one of the Vice Presidents of the United 
States, was also a member of the Convention that framed 
the Constitution. Upon the eligibility of foreigners to offices 
in the United States, in the Convention, he said: 

“ He wished in future that the eligibility (to seats in Con¬ 
gress ) might be confined to natives. Foreign powers will 
intermeddle in our affairs, and spare no expense to influence 
them. Persons having foreign attachments will be sent 
among us, and be insinuated into our councils, in order to be 
made instruments for their purposes. Every one knows the 
vast sums laid out in Europe for secret services. He was 
not singular in these ideas.' A great many of the most 
influential men in Massachusetts reasoned in the same way.” 
See Spat Ids Writings of Washington , Vol. VI, page 13, 14, 
15. The Madison Papers , Vol. Ill, page 1277, 1299. 

Fellow-citizens of the State of Tennessee, how shall we 
best protect our liberty and institutions against the “ insidi¬ 
ous wiles ” of foreign influence and machinations, if not by 
preventing the unhallowed abuse of our elective franchise — 
by closing the doors of our offices forever from the admission 
and prostitution of foreigners , 

We shall continue the discussion of the same subject, with 
citations from the opinions of other illustrious Statesmen, in 
another article. I am AN AMERICAN. 


NO. IV. 

Evils and Dangers of Foreign Influence — Further Reference to the Vietes 
of Washington , Jefferson , Jay , Pinckney , Mason , Butler , Sherman , Ran¬ 
dolph, Madison , Hamilton , and Franklin , and other Statesman of the 
Revolution. 

Gentlemen: 

Should the author of these communications ever 
be known, we trust that our advanced age and unobtrusive 



13 


life will shield us alike from the unjust imputations of vault¬ 
ing ambition, or the rude assaults of a bigoted animosity^ 
Tis these alone that have given to our mature judgment that 
achromatic cast that divests all objects of their glare of 
color. 


For forty years we have stood amid the political convul¬ 
sions that have agitated our Republic. But the storm which 
will burst upon us in 1856, whose dark clouds, even now. 
overcast our political horizon, seems to us with the most 
appaling elements fraught. Abolitionism will 

“Be rider of the wind, 

The stirrer of the storm; 

The hurricane it leaves behind 
Is ever with the lightning warm.” 


This Upas tree, with its baneful branches, sprung from for¬ 
eign seed, sown and nurtured by foreign hands. All the 
disgraceful isms which are gradually undermining the foun¬ 
dations of our social, political, and religious fabrics, are 
foreignisms — socialism, agrarianism, spiritualism, Fourier¬ 
ism, skepticism, atheism, abolitionism, Jesuitism, and Ro¬ 
man Catholicism. They are Promethean vultures, ever 
feeding upon the vitals of our Republic — insidious enemies, 
more to be dreaded than the plumed warrior or barbed steed 
of invading armies. 

We will now continue the discussion, as promised in our 
last article, why foreigners by birth should not exercise the 
elective franchise, or be eligible to ofliee in the States or 
General Government. Besides the letter referred to in arti¬ 
cle 3d, in which Gen. Washington opposed foreigners by 
birth being employed in offices of high rank and trust in our 
service, we will cite three others of his, relative to the same 
subject — one to Benjamin Franklin, dated August 14, 1777; 
the other two to Richard Henry Lee, dated May 17, 1777, 
and June 1, 1777. Remember that this was during our 
struggle for Independence, when our armies were deficient 
in numbers and discipline — when, if ever, their employment 
could be justified. 

Thomas Jefferson not only concurred with Gen. Washing¬ 
ton in his repugnance to employing foreigners by birth in 
these positions, but also in the lowest grades of the civil or 
diplomatic service. He was of the opinion that Congress 
should pass a law prohibiting them from being employed 
even as Consuls —mere commercial agents—officers of the 
Government abroad, who do not possess the least ministerial 
power. While our Minister to France in 1788, he addressed 
a letter to John Jay, dated Paris, November 14, 1788, in 
which he uses the following language : 

“ With respect to the Consular appointments, it is a duty 
on me to add some observations which my situation here has 


14 


enabled me to make. I think it was in the spring of 1784, 
4hat Congress (harrassed by multiplied applications from 
foreigners, of whom nothing was known but on their inform¬ 
ation, or on that of others, as unknown as themselves,) came 
to a resolution “that the interest of America, would not 
permit the naming of any person not a citizen to the office 
of consul, or agent, or commissary. Native citizens on sev¬ 
eral valuable accounts, are preferable to aliens , or citizens 
alien born. Native citizens possess our language; know 
our laws, customs, and commerce ; have generally, acquain¬ 
tance in the United States ; give better satisfaction, and are 
more to be relied on in point of fidelity/’ * * * To avail 

ourselves of our native citizens , it appears to me advisable 
to declare, by a standing law, that no person but a native 
citizen shall be capable of the office of consul. This was 
the rule of 1784, restrained to the office of consul, and to 
native citizens/ , 

If Mr. Jefferson was so energetically opposed to the ap¬ 
pointment of foreigners by birth, or naturalized citizens, to 
contemptible offices abroad, such as consuls, what think you 
he would have thought of appointing them to represent the 
dignity, the power and sovereignty of the United States, as 
ministers, ambassadors, or charge d’ affaires? Do you think 
he would have concurred in the appointment of the red hot 
French Republican Soule, or the Jewish bond-shaving agent 
of the Rothschilds, Belmont ? He would have denounced 
them in all the burning language of an indignant patriot. 
John Jay, to whom Mr. Jefferson addressed this letter, was 
one of the foremost men of the revolution. He was one of 
the authors of the Federalist , the ablest production on or¬ 
ganic law and government, that ever emanated from the 
brain of man; was first Chief Justice of the United States, 
and the author of the celebrated treaty of 1784, which still 
bears his name. 

Let us dismiss this portion of our discussion, by a pertinent 
interrogatory: Is it not remarkable that amid all the objec¬ 
tions so pertinaciously urged in the convention that framed 
the constitution, against the eligibility of foreigners by birth 
to seats in either house of Congress, none are urged against 
their employment in the judicial departments of govern¬ 
ment, or in a ministerial capacity abroad? The reason 
must be analagous to that given by the celebrated Athenian 
Lawgiver, Solon, when asked why he did not, in his criminal 
code, provide a penalty for the crime of parricide. His re¬ 
ply was. that it was a crime so horrible in its character, that 
he believed no one so depraved as to commit it. So must 
have thought the framers of the constitution relative to the 
appointment of foreigners by birth, to such high and respon- 




15 


sible offices ; that it argued such a degree of folly, that no 
President and Senate would commit it. It finds no paralel 
in the diplomatic history of any modern civilized nation of 
the globe. 

We will proceed with the opinions of other illustrious 
statesmen of the revolution, members of the convention that 
framed our constitution, relative to the eligibility o£foreign¬ 
ers by birth to offices in the General Government, or seats 
in the Congress of the United States. Charles Pinckney, 
of South Carolina, arose from his seat in the convention, and 
said : “As the Senate is to have the power of making trea¬ 
ties, and managing our foreign affairs, there is peculiar dan¬ 
ger and impropriety in opening its door to those who have 
foreign attachments . He quoted the jealousy of the Athe¬ 
nians on this subject, who made it death for any stranger to 
intrude his voice into their legislative proceedings” This 
Mr. Pinckney was elected four times Governor of South 
Carolina, elected to the United States Senate in 1798, and 
was our Ambassador to Spain from 1801 to 1805. George 
Mason, of Virginia, said on this occasion: “Were it not 
that many not native s of this country, had acquired great 
credit during the revolution, he should be for restraining the 
eligibility into the Senate to native citizens .” George Ma¬ 
son, in intellectual energy, delicacy of wit, extent of politi¬ 
cal attainments, and thrilling eloquence, ranked among the 
Lees, Madisons and Henrys. Pierce Butler, of South Caro¬ 
lina, in the convention said : “ He was opposed to the ad¬ 
mission of foreigners into the Senate without a long resi¬ 
dence in the country. They bring with them not only attach¬ 
ments to other countries , but ideas of government so distinct 
from ours, that in every point of view they are dangerous. 
He acknowledged that if he himself had been called into 
public life within a short time after his coming to America, 
his foreign habits , opinions , and attachments would have ren¬ 
dered him an improper agent in public affairs. He men¬ 
tioned the great strictness in Great Britain on this subject.” 
Mr. Butler, before the revolution, was a major of a British 
regiment stationed at Boston, and was a descendant of the 
Dukes of Ormund, of Ireland, and one of the first United 
States Senators from South Carolina. Americans, here is a 
foreigner by birth, who rose to eminence in the councils of 
our nation, who tells you, from his own experience, that it is 
most dangerous to appoint foreigners to offices of rank and 
trust in our country, because of their foreign attachments — 
their habits , opinions , and ideas of government are so distinct 
from ours. 

We might proceed to give the opinions of such men as 
Sherman and Randolph—the various delegates to the Con- 


1G 


vention from New-Hampshire, New-Jersey, South Carolina, 
Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, who were opposed to 
the eligibility of foreigners at all, to seats in Congress, or 
advocates of the greatest restriction, but we presume we 
have enlarged sufficiently upon this subject. Let us ob¬ 
serve, however, and we defy contradiction, that the para¬ 
mount consideration with all those who were in favor of 
admitting foreigners, under any circumstances, to offices of 
honor and responsibility in our government, at this period, 
was that their total exclusion would incapacitate some of the 
most distinguished men that had led our armies to victory, 
or assisted in framing our constitutional government. This 
ungrateful tribute to their merit influenced James Madison, 
Alexander Hamilton, and Benjamin Franklin, who, at the 
very same time, expressed their great apprehensions of the 
future. Could they have looked through the vista of sixty 
years, and beheld the character and tide of our present emi¬ 
gration — not men such as were of the revolution, of talent, 
education, of fortune, distinction, possessing an ardent love 
of constitutional liberty, law-abiding, and of high moral 
worth — but the tide swelling from 3,000 annually to 400,- 
000, the large majority ignorant, degraded men, the contents 
of foreign penitentiaries, dungeons, hospitals, infirmaries, and 
pauper houses — foreigners uneducated, the prolific source 
of all our riots, murders, midnight robberies, house-burnings, 
of religious and civil dissensions, that will bring upon us 
ultimately, we fear, the loss of our political Paradise with 
unnumbered woes; we say, could they have seen what we 
now witness, they would have then urged upon the States, 
and the General Government, that at the expiration of a 
future period, no foreigner by birth should exercise the elec¬ 
tive franchise, or be eligible to any office in the State or 
under the Federal Government. 

We will conclude this article by a reference to the senti¬ 
ments of Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, in relation 
to the dangers of foreign influence exercised upon the coun¬ 
cils of our nation. Mr. Hamilton observed that, “One of 
the weakest sides of Republics was their being liable to for¬ 
eign influence and corruption. Men of little character acqui¬ 
ring great power, become easily the tools of intermeddling 
neighbors. Sweden was a striking instance. The French 
and English had each their parties during the late revolution, 
which was effected by the predominant influence of the 
former. What is the inference from all these observations? 
That we ought to go as far in order to obtain stability and 
* permanency for our Republican principles as they will ad¬ 
mit.” Mr. Madison, also, speaking of foreign influence over 
the departments of the general government, says: “ He 


17 


pretended not to say that any such influence had yet been 
tried ; but it was naturally to be expected, that occasions 
would produce it. As lessons which claim particular atten¬ 
tion, he cited the intrigues practiced among the Amphictionic 
Confederates, first by the Kings of Persia, and afterwards 
fatally by Philip of Macedon ; among the Achaians, first,by 
Macedon, and afterwards no less fatally by Rome; among 
the Swiss, by Austria, France, and the lesser neighboring 
powers; among the Germanic Diets by France, England, 
Spain, and Russia; and in the Belgic Republic by all the 
great neighboring powers.” 

Thus we have heard the solemn admonitions of the wisest 
and best men that ever adorned the illustrious pages of their 
country’s history. Our Congress has not yet become as pro¬ 
verbially corrupt as the British Parliament; yet, in time it 
may so become. Corruptions of an extraordinary character 
have developed themselves in other departments of the 
general government. This will open the door to foreign 
intrigue and gold. If millions are spent, in Europe by Rus¬ 
sia, England, France, Prussia, Austria and the Pope, to 
influence the councils of nations, and change the tides of 
empire withersoever they may direct, think you, Americans, 
that their secret spies and emissaries are not in swarms 
amongst us ? Shall we save our beloved country from the 
thick gathering perils that surround her — from the fearful 
vortex of ruin to which foreign influence is precipitating 
her ? If so, we must preserve our ballot box from their 
abuse — our offices from their prostitution. A wise precau¬ 
tion may avert danger; but indiscretion will certainly bring 
it on. i am AN AMERICAN. 


■ NO. V. 

Natural and Legal Rights of Individuals and Nations, touching Emigra¬ 
tion — Extent and Character of our Foreign Immigration — Foreignwn 
a Prolific Source of Abolitionism. 

Gentlemen : Our last article concluded with an allusion to 
the extent and character of our present immigration, in con¬ 
tradistinction to that of the revolution. We spoke in a 
general , not an exceptive sense. For well we know there 
are many foreigners by birth among us, whose social virtues 
ornament the varied circles of private life — some who 
have illumined the councils of our nation by the light of 
their experience and wisdom — some who have irradiated 
tire classic pages of our literature with the bright halo of 
2 



IS 


resplendent genuis; some who, on the battle-fields of 
immortal memory, by their deeds of chivalry, bv their 
heart’s blood of devotion, have shed upon our national 
escutcheon the splendor of an unfading glory. Of such we 
spoke not. But for you, also, and your children forever, we 
wish to preserve the memory of your illustrious deeds, and 
the ineffable blessings of our free institutions. 

One word to our Know Nothing friends throughout the 
State: Organize! Organize!! Be united in action, and 
unanimous in council. In these consist our invincibility. 
You may expect your motives and principles aspersed. But 
we will be just, and fear not, for “ all the ends we aim at, 
are our country’s, God’s, and truth’s. 5 ’ These shall vindi¬ 
cate our integrity and patriotism. 

We will now proceed to discuss the subject of this arti¬ 
cle — the extent and character of our immigration. 

The right of individuals to emigrate has been claimed by 
some ethical and political philosophers as inalienable. They 
reason thus: Every man is endowed with certain inalienable 
rights, as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Now, 
if individuals find that in the exercise and enjoyment of 
these, the greatest amount of happiness of which their 
varied condition is susceptible cannot be attained by the 
laws and government of one State, they have the inaliena¬ 
ble right to leave this, and go into another which they may 
prefer. Thus, the right to emigrate as well as immigrate, 
they claim as absolute and imprescriptable, because they 
are correlative — the one being impossible without the 
other. Judge Blackstone terms them absolute rights : 

“ For they belong to the persons of individuals in a state 
of nature , and which every man is entitled to enjoy, whether 
out of society or in it.”— Ckitty's Blackstone , vol. 1 p. 87. 

We confess that we were never fascinated with the illu¬ 
sive reveries of philosophers like the wild Rousseau ; or the 
beatific visions of poets, who dream of the golden age of 
innocent ignorance, of savage virtue, uncorrupted by the 
vices of civilization. Has man any absolute rights, or 
those of any character in a “ state of nature,” out of soci¬ 
ety, as Judge Blackstone supposes ? We answer no ! Man, 
divested of his moral, social, and intellectual nature, is man 
in a state of nature, He has but one of his natures remain¬ 
ing, that is his phj'sical. Man possessing only his physical 
nature, and “ out of society,” is but an animal in the forest; 
less than a baboon, because, in his infancy, he is the most 
helpless of all animals. Have animals inalienable or abso¬ 
lute rights? No, they have none at all. For we are told 
by the “ Lips of Inspiration,” that all that wing the air. 
or roam the woods, or roll along the floods, were placed. 


19 


under the absolute dominion of man. Therefore, man, in a 
“ state of nature, out of society,” is a mere animal; and 
would have no rights, either alienable or inalienable. The 
presumption of Blackstone is false ; for mankind has never 
been found out of society,“ in a state of nature,” since the 
commencement of the world. Can man reproduce himself? 
No. Therefore, woman is the complement of man, and as 
suen they were created together. And they, with angels 
and the Creator of their beautiful world, formed their first 
society — ’twas in Paradise. Adam and Eve dropped from 
the plastic hand of the Almighty, perfect, fully developed 
in all their physical, moral, and intellectual proportions. 
Hence, society is coeval with the existence of man, being 
as indispensable to his moral, social, and intellectual nature, 
as food for his physical. But what is society without laws, 
or government ? or what are these, hut to force individuals 
to do what they should do, and abstain from what they 
should not do, all in the varied relations of life ? There¬ 
fore, the rights of individuals, are as they have been from 
the beginning of time, relative — not “absolute or inaliena¬ 
ble ” — controlled by the societies or governments of which 
they may be members. ’Tis phrase absurd to will the right 
of emigration or immigration, absolute or inalienable. The 
object of ail Governments is to promote the prosperity and 
felicity of their citizens. Therefore, the right of self-pro¬ 
tection is as inalienable and absolute in Nations as in indi¬ 
viduals, and each Nation is sole Judge of what will best 
promote, or what may defeat these objects of its existence. 
All nations, for the commission of crimes, imprison, and 
even take the lives of the citizen. All nations claim the 
right of expelling in peace or in war foreigners from their 
realm, whose presence maybe dangerous to their welfare. 
All nations claim the right of restraining the emigration of 
their citizens when an invading foe threatens the destruc¬ 
tion of their national existence. And yet these indisputable 
rights of governments, are in direct contravention of the 
inalienable or absolute right; of individuals to emigrate or 
immigrate. In international law, the comity of nations has 
never recognized the right of one government to send its 
citizens, even in a ministerial capacity, into the dominions 
of another, without its authorized approval. From -their 
inalienable right, suppose we permitted all nations that 
desired, to immigrate to America, what would become of 
our language, our religion, our laws, institutions, and nation¬ 
ality ? There are in the world, 1,000,000,000 of inhabitants ; 
the number of languages spoken, 8,000; different religions, 
1.000. Would not one-fourth of these inhabitants, with 
their different languages, religions, morals, and habits. 


20 


immigrating to the United States, obliterate Americanism 
from the face of the globe ? Did not the immigration of 
Goths and Vandals, of Huns and Ostrogoths in the Homan 
Empire, sweep away from the Roman world almost every 
vestige of its arts and sciences — all the monuments of its 
genius and civilization? It was from these very considera- 
-tions that the Jews, who were called the peculiar people of 
God, were commanded not to inter marry with the heathen, 
not to admit them to citizenship — to the blessings of their 
civil or religious institutions. For a little leaven leaveneth 
the whole lump. But the Jews disobeyed these admoni¬ 
tions of the Almighty, and they have, with the Greek and 
Roman, and every nation that followed their example, been 
swept from the world’s theatre, as with a besom of destruc¬ 
tion. This admission into our country of foreigners from 
every realm, with their different languages, religions, laws, 
and institutions, is to bring upon us also, we fear, a starless 
night of desolation. Thus is it evident that all Govern¬ 
ments have the right to protect themselves and their citizens 
against all foreign force or influence, whether of forcible 
invasion or immigration. Let us examine first the extent, 
then the character, of this foreign immigration. 

First, its extent. We have examined various census 
reports, not only from our own statistical bureaus, but from 
those of Great Britain, France, and Germany — Hunt’s Mer¬ 
chants’ Magazine, DeBow’s Review, as well as the estimates 
of Tucker, Jarvis, and Chickering. Our careful estimate 


may be relied upon, therefore: 

Total population of the U. S. in 1850,.23,200,000 

Total white population in 1850,.19,561,192 

Total foreign population and increase in 1850,* • 2,500,000 
Total “ “ “ 1854,. • 3,500,000 


Our Census Bureau estimated the total population for 
1850, at 23,191,876. Hunt’s Merchants’ Magazine, 23,257,- 
723. The Census Bureau estimates the foreign population 
and its increase in 1850, at 2,244,648 ; Hunt’s Magazine at 
3,191,909; Dr. Chickering at 4,303,416. From 1850 to 1854, 
there arrived at the port of New-York alone, of Germans 
and Irish, 932,009; of Germans 458,261 ; of Irsh 474,748. 
In 1851 the Germans amounted to 60,883; in 1854 to 168,- 
728. The Irish in 1850 amounted to 163,256; in 1854 to 
80,200. Thus the German emigration is much greater at 
present than the Irish. 

According to Hunt’s Magazine and Dr. Chickering, 1 out 
of every 5 or 6 of our white population is a foreigner by 
birth, or of immediate descent; by the Census Bureau, 1 in 
8; and by our estimate, which is the most probable, 1 in 




21 


every 7—fractions in all cases rejected. If the future 
increment of our foreign population be as great as it has 

been since 1850, the ratio will be reduced from 1 to every 

%/ 

7, to 1 in every 4 of our white population. 

Of the 2,500,000 foreigners in the United States, one-half 
cannot read or write intelligibly our language; three-fourths 
have no intelligent ideas of our language, institutions, or 
the genius of our government. Yet the naturalization laws 
presume, in the short space of five years, by some sort of 
galvanism or exorcism — certainly by no educational pro¬ 
cess— that these illiterate foreigners can as thoroughly com¬ 
prehend them as a native citizen, and hence dignify them with 
all the rights and privileges of American citizenship. It is 
selling our glorious heritage for a mess of potage. Our 
language and complex machinery of government, to for¬ 
eigners, are the most difficult to comprehend, and what it 
requires us 25 or 30 years to accomplish, these ignorant and 
unlettered “ strangers ” can do in the short space of five 
years. How stupid we are, or how remarkably gifted they 
must be. O age , art thou not ashamed of us ! O my coun¬ 
try, hast thou not lost the “ breed of noble blood /” 

Foreignism is the prolific source of Abolitionism. For¬ 
eigners, upon their arrival in the United States, are taught 
that slave labor is cheaper than free labor, and that to work 
by the side of a slave, or for the same wages, sinks them to 
the degraded level of a slave. Besides, he is taught, from 
national jealousy and hatred, to oppose slavery; yet in their 
own Fatherland, themselves may be bondmen, without many 
of the comforts or conveniences of slaves. According to 
our Census Report of 1850, there were at that time in the 
United States, of foreigners born in foreign countries, 2,210,- 
830. There were : 


In the Slave States,* * *. 30%,457 

In the Free States,.1,845,382 

Unknown,.*.. • • • 33,809 

Of the Slave States : 


Missouri had 
Louisiana “• 
Maryland “ 
Kentucky “• 
Virginia “ 
Texas “• 
Delaware “* 


72,474 

66,413 

53,288 

29,189 

22,394 

16,774 

5,211 


Total,. 265,743 

Out of 305,457 of foreign born in the 15 Slave States, 
these seven contained in 1850,265,743 — residue in the 8 














22 


States, 40,714. Tennessee 5,740, There were in the States 


of 

New-York,. 051,801 

Massachusetts,. 100,909 

Vermont,.... • 32,801 

Pennsylvania,* • .. 294,871 

Ohio,. 218,512 

Illinois,.. 110,594 

Wisconsin,.*. 106,695 


Total in these seven States,.. 1,543,441 


These seven States contain out of a total foreign born 
population in the Free States, 1,845,382, at least 1,543,441, 
residue 301,941. 

Thus we see that these seven Free States contain nearly 
all the foreign population of our country ; and, as we will 
soon see, nearly all the Abolition or ultra Freesoil vote of 
the United States. In 1848, out of a total vote for Martin 
Van Buren for the Presidency of 291,078, they gave 245,- 
418 — residue 47,260. In 1853, they gave for John P. Hale, 
the Abolition candidate for the Presidency, 122,929 votes of 
the total given, 157,290 — residue 34,367. New-York,. Ohio, 
Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Illinois, Vermont, and Connecti¬ 
cut, are the hot beds of Abolitionism. 

If we look towards the South, we will also see that Abo¬ 
litionism is the violent concomitant of foreignism. Missouri 
has more foreigners than any other Southern State, and she 
has also more Abolitionists or ultra Freesoilers. Next come 
Kentucky, Delaware, and Maryland, for their total popula¬ 
tion. These States haw, ever given for Van Buren and Hale, 
and upon all test questions, the largest Freesoil vote. The 
foreign population of Louisiana, SoUth-Carolina and Texas, 
are nearly all Frenchmen, Spaniards, or Mexicans. These 
have never interfered with our local institutions, because 
their vocations are generally mercantile; and being from 
the West Indies or Mexico, are sympathetic in language, 

blood, and institutions with manv of the native citizens of 
* 

these States. Our emigration from the British Isles and 
Germany, that overwhelmingly preponderate in the Free 
States, are nearly all Abolitionists, from education and inter¬ 
est. Therefore. Americans, if we would dry up the fountain 
head of all our national animosity and sectional disquietude, 
we must extract from all future immigrants the power to 
affect them. What care they for the compacts of the Con¬ 
stitution, or what know they of, or care for the rights of the 
individual States? Their fathers fought not for our inde¬ 
pendence, and framed not our glorious Constitution. And 
when they witness our Anniversary Celebration of the 











23 


Fourth of July, and the Twenty-Second of February, and 
the Eighth of January, do their souls, like ours, swell with 
the inspirations of the Divinity that presides over them ? 
When they tread upon the immortal dust that consecrates' 
the battle-fields of Lexington and Concord, of Yorktown 
and Brandywine, of Chippewa and New-Orleans, do they 
feel, like we do, their souls rise kindling within them ? Do 
they shed over our sweetest memories of the past, the 
warm tears of gratitude and love ? Remember, children of 
those ancestors who pierced with the death-shot and the 
bayonet the bosoms of freemen struggling for liberty, that 
with a generous forgiveness, the same bosoms are opened 
as friends to receive you. They merely demand that they 
alone shall administer the laws and government which they 
alone fought for and established. Surely the owners of the 
Vinevard should select their laborers. 

In our next we shall continue the same subject. I am 

AN AMERICAN. 


NO. VL 

Civil and Religious Freedom Maintained — The Extent and Character of 
our Foreign Immigration further considered in reference to our Territo¬ 
rial area , and as a Prolific Source oj Abolitionism , and Pauperism. 

Gentlemen: We have been charged with being the pro¬ 
moters of a religious animosity — the heralds of a religious 
persecution. This is false. We would not, for any tem¬ 
poral boon, betray the great principles of our civil and 
religious freedom. We would not permit any temporal arm 
to profane the sacred Ark of our holy religion. Unlike the 
the frantic Jacobin, we would not erect a splendid shrine, 
even to Liberty, upon the ruins of the temple of the 
Almighty. But we would preserve separate and inviolable 
our political and religious liberty r . We would preserve 
immaculate that other light, which is ‘‘light from Heaven/’ 
and which, like the fiery pillar to captive Israel, cheered 
our.forefathers through the storms of a seven-years Revolu¬ 
tion, and upon whose imperishable foundations, rises the 
✓splendid fabric of our national glory. We would sever 
forever the adulterous connection between the Church and 
the State — between the Throne and the Altar. For by it 
Infidelity has achieved a more extended dominion than by 
all the sophisms of her philosophy, or the terrors of a bloody 
persecution. It has made Court appendages of God’s apos¬ 
tles, and of the Almighty himself, a Court purveyor; “it 




24 


has carved the Cross into a chair of State, where, with 
grace upon his brow, and gold in his hand, the little Puppet 
of this world's vanity makes Omnipotence a menial to his 
power, and Eternity a pander to his profits.” Yes, we spurn 
alike the temporal interference of the Pope, and the spiritual 
jurisdiction of the State. We would render unto Caesar the 
things that are' Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are 
God’s. This must suffice upon this topic, for the present; 
in due season we will confront all the charges made against 
the American Order, and put them to the blush. Let us 
proceed to the subject of this article — a further examina- 
of the extent and character of our foreign immigration. 

In our last article, we demonstrated the fact, that the 
Abolition influence and vote of the North had increased with 
the astonishing increase of our naturalized citizens. And 
it is upon this ratio, as a basis, such Abolitionists as Thurlow 
Weed, Horace Greely, and William H. Seward, have made 
their future calculations of a disruption of this Union. For 
have they not, throughout the entire North, allied themselves 
with the foreign vote, and the Roman Catholic influence ? 
Cheek by jowl stand, to-day, William H. Seward, the head 
and front of the Abolitionists, and Archbishop Hughes, the 
soul and body of the Roman Catholics of the United States. 
How formidable this combination! O, my country ! thou 
art as dear to me as are the “ ruddy drops which now visit 
ray sad heart.” Like some sweet jessamine, thou hast en¬ 
twined thyself around about me, ever exhaling thy fra¬ 
grance and thy love.' God of our beloved Washington, 
snatch us from the jaws of the dreadful maelstroom to which 
our Ship of State is fast drifting! For thou alone can min¬ 
ister to a nation whose mind is diseased, and pluck from its 
bosom all rooted evils. For the children of thy adoption, 
bare thy same Almighty arm, for hope and deliverance, upon 
which reposed the strong faith of our Revolutionary sires. 
Confound and overwhelm the councils of these plotters of 
ouf national destruction, and bring thy favored people pure 
and refined once more out of the terrible ordeal through 
which they are passing. 

We have given one — let us proceed to give another, of 
the evil consequences arising from the extent of our foreign 
immigration. A nation, like an individual, should he just 
before it is generous; and a nation, like an individual, is 
worse than an infidel, that will not provide for its own fam¬ 
ily. These are the evident duties of nations, as well as indi¬ 
viduals. Is our territorial domain of such unlimited extent 
that it would be just or provident in us, as a nation, to invite 
every stranger from abroad to a partiiion of this inheritance 
of our children ! For a great nation confines not its caicu- 


25 


lations to the present, but to the future it looks for its blazon 
of immortality , and advances its standards to the very confines 
of time . Then, have we more territorial domain than we 
want for our present population, and their succeeding gen¬ 
erations ? We will see. The deductions which we submit 
to your solemn reflection, are from calculations based upon 
two of the most reliable sources of statistical information in 
the United States — the Census Bureau, and Hunt’s Mer¬ 
chants’ Magazine. The former supposes our total popula¬ 
tion in 1850 to have amounted to 23,191,876 ; the latter, 
23,257,723. The former estimates our total territorial do¬ 
main at 2,936,166 square miles ; the latter, at 3,136,447. 
There is but a slight difference between these authorities. 
We will take the Census Report for our first hypothesis. If 
our future increase of population for 95 years be such as it 
was from 1840 to 1850 — at the rate of 35.87 percent — 
we will have a population 

In 1860,. 21,510,802 

in 1900,.107,387,504 

In 1950,.497,246,365 

If our future increase should be such as it has been from 
1790 to 1850 — at the rate of 34.445 percent-—we will 
then have a population of, 

In 1860,. 31,178,998 

In 1900,. 101,838,397 

In 1950,.447,159,670 . 


Thus, by either of these calculations, we will swell our 
present population in 95 years to four hundred and fifty mil¬ 
lions— almost one-half of the present population of the 
globe. Our calculations based upon that of Hunt’s Mer¬ 
chants’ Magazine, estimating our future increase for 95 
years according to his ratio of our increase from 1840 to 
1850, at 36.25 per cent., would give us a population of, 

In 1860,. 31,686,647 

In 1900,. 109,206,811 

In 1950,.512,781,414 


The average ratio from 1790 to 1850, without including 
immigrants , according to Hunt’s Magazine, is about 30 per 
cent., and according to this, our future population will be, 

In I860,. 30,335,039 

In 1900,. 86,639,902 

In 1950,. 321.687,886 


With these results staring us in the face, is it just or prov¬ 
ident in a wise nation to distribute among strangers, who do 
not appreciate the boon, the inheritance of our own chil¬ 
dren, every inch of which they will need in 95 years? Re¬ 
member, too, that much of our national domain can never 














be occupied or tilled. For it consists of barren wastes and 
mountains, of wide lakes and rivers. We should question 
the wisdom of that man’s charity who would go abroad to 
iind objects for its blessings, while he leaves his own family 
at home to future beggary and starvation. “Let thy charity 
commence first at home,” Americans ! Already our popula¬ 
tion is so dense that we have 7 to every square mile; and if 
it equaled that of Norway and Sweden, it would amount to 
45,000,000, or 15 inhabitants to the square mile ; if it equaled 
Russia’s, it would amount to 85,000,000, or 28 to the square 
mile; if equal to Spain’s, 200,000,000, or 78 to the square 
mile ; if equal to that of France, 500,000,000, or 172 to the 
square mile. Do we desire this redundant population, with 
its millions of paupers, and millions of money to sustain 
them ; with extreme poverty and extreme low wages of 
labor; with millions of objects of charity ; with the loss of 
our national vigor and health ; with crime and debauchery ; 
with licentiousness aud decay? Let us take one element of 
an overgrown population— pauperism — and see what it 
would cost us nationally, if our population was much more 
dense. England and Wales in 1840 contained a population 
of 15,800,000, and the public expenditure for pauperism was 
over $22,000,000; in 1848, their population amounted to 
17,500,000, and their public expenditure to $30,000,000 ; at 
this time, 1855, it would amount to at least $40,000,000. 
This immense amount is independent of private charities, 
given in 1848, to over 1,600,000 paupers. This single ele¬ 
ment of a redundant population costs England and Wales 
as many millions as would defray annually the total expen¬ 
ses of our Government. Let us look to Massachusetts, the 
most densely populated State in our Union, affording as it 
does, further evidence of this fact. In 1845 the city of Bos¬ 
ton alone paid for her pauperism $24,000, and the State paid 
for the same $27,000 —• total $51,000 ; and this sum is inde¬ 
pendent of private charities given to 3,478 paupers In 
1854, her pauperism, three-fourths of which was foreign , 
could not have cost less, publicly and privately, than $100,- 
000. New-York, with its 500,000 inhabitants, contained lest 
year (as we are informed by the public press,) at least 80,- 
000 inhabitants at one time, who were objects of public 
and private charity, and these, also, were nearly all foreign¬ 
ers. If New-York had contained a population of 3.000,000, 
what, last year, would have been the number of her paupers , 
the extremity of their sufferings, and the vast expenditures 
for their relief? Americans, this rapid increase of foreign 
immigration must be curtailed and regulated ; our territo¬ 
rial domain husbanded for our own children, and our vast 
public and private expenditures for foreign pauperism 


27 


abridged, or our future will be filled with the most terrible 
consequences. 

Contemplating the past, and glancing at the future, what 
a powerful nation for good or evil, (if we remain united,) 
are we destined to become — compared to which the storied 
grandeur of Babylonian, Assyrian, and Roman Empires 
dwindle into insignificance. Like Jonah’s gourd, in a night 
we have sprung into existence, and cast our shadow far 
over the green earth. If fall we must, if not by suicidal or 
fratricidal hands, it will be only by foreign influence and 
immigration. L T nited, even now, w r e could prevail against 
invading Europe, bristling in arms. If sink we must, let us 
go down beneath the waves, like a full orbed sun in a cloud¬ 
less sky, leaving as a golden radiance behind, the memory of 
illustrious virtues, that will illumine the tomb in which our 
greatness lies inurned. 

The next branch of our subject is the character' of our 
foreign immigration—a volume whose gloomy pages har¬ 
row up the soul. Pauperism and crime are the chief fea¬ 
tures of this character. By an examination of the Census 
Reports of 1850, you find that the whole number of paupers 
supported in whole or in part by the States of this Union in 
the year 1849, was 134,9*2; of which number there were 
68.538 foreign paupers — over one half. They cost the 
State Governments and the counties in round numbers $3,- 
000,000. Thus foreign immigration, by pauperism alone, 
entailed upon the States in 1849, an expenditure of more 
than $1,500,000. Remember that this enormous amount is 
independent of private charities to foreign paupers, which 
throughout the North alone would amount to $500,000 
additional. This was in 1849 ; 'since which time our for¬ 
eign population has increased much more rapidly. To-day, 
foreign pauperism alone costs the citizens of the United 
States not less annually than $2,500,000 or three millions of 
dollars. 

JNew-York has a larger foreign population than any other 
State in the Union. The paupers of New-York, supported 
by the State in 1849, amounted to 59,855, and they cost the 
State $817,336. Out of this almost incredible number, 40,- 
580 were foreigners. Massachusetts had in 1849, 15,777 
paupers supported by the State and counties ; of this num¬ 
ber 9,247, were foreigners — the total cost was about $400,- 
000. This was also independent of private charities. In 
1855 the total cost of foreign pauperism to the State cannot 
be less than $300,000. The same ratio of numbers and 
cost of foreign pauperism extends throughout the entire 
North — proportionate to their foreign population. 


> 


28 


This fact is proven also from the Southern or Slave States 
in which the foreign population is greatest. Missouri has a 
greater foreign population than any other Slave State. In 
1849, of a total number, 2,977 of State paupers, 1,729 were 
foreigners; total cost of support $53,243. Maryland, next 
to Missouri in its amount of foreign population, had in 1849, 
4,494 paupers; out of which number 1,903 were foreigners. 
The total number of Slave States in the Union is fifteen. 
They had in 1849 total number of paupers 21,258; of theso 
only 4,848 were foreigners; and the total cost to these fif¬ 
teen States for pauperism, was $602,902. Thus you see that 
New-York alone is annually taxed to support twice as many 
foreign paupers, as there are native and foreign paupers in 
the whole fifteen Slave States; and at a cost equal to that 
of their entire pauper population. A very astute statician 
calculates that annually the people of the United States are 
taxed ($4,000,000)— four millions of dollars to support for¬ 
eign pauperism. This amount would in 20 years build our 
Pacific Railroad. 

How cursed are the Northern States with, and how blessed 
are the Southern States without, this foreign population. 
But this is only one of its features. How much better would 
it be for us and our children, if we were rid of this foreign 
incubus, and the millions we annually expend for its support 
were expended for the education of our children, or the 
internal improvements of the States'! 

Fellow-citizens, what think you, from this glance, of the 
future unfoldings of the picture ? Are such fit persons to 
exercise the elective franchise — to hold office — to enjoy all 
the immunities and privileges of American citizens — to 
wield hereafter the destinies of our glorious Republic ? 

The same subject to be continued in our next. I am 

AN AMERICAN. 


NO. VII. 

Objections to the American Order considered—Secrecy — Proscription — 
Mystery — Mode of Nominating and Electing Candidates for Office, 
opposed to Demagogueical Electioneering. 

Gentlemen : Before we resume the further discussion of 
the character of our foreign population, let us briefly notice 
some of the objections which have been urged against our 
Order. 

It is said our organization is secret in its character , and 
therefore dangerous to popular liberty and constitutional 



29 


government. Bat this objection is no less applicable to 
Free-Masonry, Odd-Fellowship, the Sons of Temperance, 
and similar kindred secret associations. It is said that the 
members of our Order are bound together by the most solemn 
obligations , and therefore it is criminal as well as objection¬ 
able. But this objection is likewise applicable to Free-Ma¬ 
sonry, Odd-Fellowship, and the Sons of Temperance. It is 
said that our Order is political in its origin and end, and that 
ambitious demagogues and parties will avail themselves of 
its potency for the promotion of their selfish advancement, or 
the subversion of our Republican institutions. But the same 
has been alleged of Free-Masonry and the Sons of Temper¬ 
ance. Wm. H. Seward, the chief priest of Northern Abo¬ 
litionists and the “ higher law party,’’ owes his first political 
elevation to his opposition to Free-Masonry, and every 
beardless demagogue make his opposition to, or advocacy of 
Temperance, his first political hobby. Why do not these 
fastidious opponents of our Order object to the secret councils 
of the President and his Cabinet, to those of the Executive 
Committees of the Whig and Democratic parties during the 
sessions of Congress, and their District, State, and Federal 
elections; for all these are “sealed books ” to the public eye, 
and are of apolitical and party character; the most potent 
auxiliaries of individual and party advancement? Why do 
they not object to those most secret and mysterious religious 
denominations — the Jesuits and Roman Catholics — the 
solemn and awful oaths of allegiance made by their Priests, 
Bishops, Archbishops, and Cardinals, to their spiritual and 
temporal sovereign, the Pope ? Would the penalty of death 
extort from Bishop Miles, or Archbishop Hughes, a transcript 
of their oaths of ordination and allegiance to Pope Pius the 
Ninth ? No, never. Here is a religion that erects behind 
all constitutions and governments a throne of obedience as 
high as heaven — whose day-god has been universal domina¬ 
tion, spiritual and temporal — that amid all the changes of 
thrones and dynasties, for hundreds of years, has struggled 
for the keys of kingdoms, and the treasures of all nations. 

To whom are we dangerous? To the American people? 
’Tis impossible ; for native Americans of all political parties 
may join us if they desire. Certainly, therefore, the Ameri¬ 
can people can not be dangerous to themselves ; they will 
not commit political suicide ; they will not subvert their own 
liberty and institutions. Do not the American people now 
wield all political power in this government — are they not 
its centre and circumference ? We do not seek to disturb 
them, but to confirm and establish the same people in their 
legitimate and constitutional supremacy forever. To what 




30 


are we dangerous? To the Constitution of the United 
States, or to those of the States? No ; but these we swear, 
upon the altars of the Fathers of our Republic and our God, 
to support and maintain even by our hearts’ blood. 

| Again, it is said that we exclude some citizens from our 
Order, and, therefore, it is proscriptive . We exclude those 
only unworthy of general confidence , or who do not regard 
our obligations as obligatory upon themselves. All such 
are excluded as witnesses in our courts of judicature ; from 
the Orders of Free-Masons, Sons of Temperance, and Odd- 
Fellows. We do not force or inveigle any to join our Order. 
We seek no one, but are sought by all; and no one is permit¬ 
ted membership until he is made acquainted with the char¬ 
acter of our order and his obligations. No member of our 
order is bound by any obligation repugnant to the constitu¬ 
tion of the United States or that of the State in which he 
resides, for we have no such obligations. If any member of 
our order desires to withdraw, he receives an honorable dis¬ 
missal, and may, if he prefers, oppose privately or publicly 
car organization, and he is not for this persecuted or de¬ 
nounced. We only demand of such not to reveal anything 
which was confided to their honor and veracity as gentle¬ 
men and Christians. In all this we do not differ from Free- 
Masons, Sons of Temperance, and Odd-Fellows. The 
objects and ends of these secret benevolent institutions, are 
generous, noble, beautiful, to-wit: benevolence, charity, and 
temperance; but those of our organization are loftier and 
more comprehensive; to preserve perpetually our beloved 
country with all of its glorious civil, political, moral, and 
religious institutions, in their pristine vigor and excellence. 

Our order is called a mysterious and impenetrable associ¬ 
ation. Yet five hundred newspapers throughout the Union 
have hung our banners upon their outer walls, openly and 
defiantly proclaiming our principles and sentiments, while 
distinguished statesmen in and out of Congress, and citizens 
in every State of the Union, upon the house tops and in the 
streets, are daily advocating them against the aspersions of 
their enemies. We established the first council in this State 
some five months ago, and now we number over 275 councils 
and 50,000 members ; and should our future accessions com¬ 
pare favorably with our past, by July next we will number 
over 400 lodges, and from seventy-five to one hundred thou¬ 
sand members. We are as united as a band of brothers, and 
stand like “ grey hounds in the slips, straining upon the 
start,” to avail ourselves of every opportunity to rescue our 
country from the only fearful danger that now imminently 
threatens it — foreign influence at home and abroad. 


31 


We are called a secret organization, and yet the Indiana 
Sentinel, the Democratic Review, and the Nashville Union 
have, as they presumed , published to the world our signs, 
keys, pass-words, and constitution. Will gentlemen who 
believe in their genuineness attempt to enter our Council 
chambers through these delusive lattices ? Credulity is ever 
the offspring or handmaid of ignorance, fanaticism, or ma¬ 
lignity. We once heard of Morgan’s revelations of Masonry. 
None enjoyed the hoax so much as Masons. For they would, 
with those who were duped into the belief of their truth, 
upturn their eyes, and with them exclaim, “ ’Twas strange, 
’twas passing strange ; ’twas pitiful, ’twas wondrous pitiful.” 
An amusing occurrence happened in our little village yes¬ 
terday. One of the seemingly knowing b’hoys accosted a 
lobster headed companion in the street with the “ Nashville 
Union” in his hand, bellowing out “Eastman’s got ’um — 
Eastman’s got’urn.” “ Yes,” replied the companion, “just 
read it, so I have — I told you so — I told you so.” The far¬ 
cical occurrence reminded us very much of the trite story of 
the calf and the grindstone . As the story goes — there was 
once a doting husband who had a wife remarkable for her 
prophetic ken , who, whenever her husband announced to her 
any startling fact, always bounced upon her feet and replied, 
“ I told you so — I told you so.” One day the husband wish¬ 
ing to have a little fun, rushed into the house and cried out 
at the top of his voice’ “ Old woman ! old woman ! the calf 
has swallowed the grindstone ! ” “ The devil you say,” she 

exclaimed, “ I told you so .” “ If you did old lady,” very 

coolly replied.the husband, “ you told a devil of a lie /” 

One of the objects of our Order is to put an end to all 
demagogueism and the present vitiating and bankrupting 
mode of electioneering. Our candidates for all offices are 
nominated by the majority of all the members legally com¬ 
petent to vote in their election; without their solicitation or 
importunity. The office seeks them, they cannot seek it. 
Hence we procure generally the very best men. No mem¬ 
ber of our Order can, when nominated, electioneer in cross 
road groceries or drinking saloons, or use the ordinary cor¬ 
rupt mode of canvassing to secure his election. If so, and 
the Order is cognizant of the fact, they will withdraw his 
name, and besides he subjects himself to expulsion. On the 
day of the election each member proceeds quietly to the 
polls and deposits his vote, and cannot solicit or bribe others 
to vote for his candidate. This prevents riots, bloodshed 
and strife at the ballot-box, and the illegal and criminal ex¬ 
ercise of the elective franchise. 

How important these reformations, when we remember 
the excitements, riots, affrays, bettings, buying up of votes 


32 


t 


illegal voting, drunkenness, debauchery, and other iniquities 
that have characterized past canvasses and election days. 
Such are some of the plain and truthful expositions of our 
Order. 

One word to the gallant brothers of our Order, and we 
will close this article. The canvass is opening— stand fast 
to your colors, and victory will set upon our helms. Remem¬ 
ber the inspiring words of the heroic Nelson to his sailor sol¬ 
diers at the battle of Trafalgar — “England (your country) 
expects every man to do his duty.” I am 

AN AMERICAN. 


NO. VIII. 

• * 

The Sublime virtue of Patriotism — Reflections suggested by the Exalted 
Position of the United States among the Nations of the Earth — For¬ 
eign enmity to our Republican Government — Foreign elements of dis¬ 
sension and insecurity in our midst — In the Army, Navy, and Civil 
Offices of the Country — The Foreign Vote and Influence in Presiden¬ 
tial Elections—The Balance of Power—The Character of our For¬ 
eign-born Population further considered, with reference to Crime and 
Ignorance — Additional Views of Washington and Jefferson. 

Gentlemen : Patriotism is a divine love of country — it is 
the religion of liberty — a sublime virtue of the most ex¬ 
alted minds. Our country is our common Mother, in whose 
unity all isolated individuals are merged .and blended— 
whose sacred name expresses the voluntary fusion of all in¬ 
terests into one sole interest, of all lives into one perpetually 
enduring life. This holy fusion of all interests and life into 
one, is the prolific source of ineffable blessings; the inex¬ 
haustible origin of a continual and otherwise impossible 
progress; the pure fountain from which issue all moral, in¬ 
tellectual, and national development, productive energy, 
security and prosperity. It exists and is perpetuated, by the 
devotion of each to all, by banishing from the heart all 
abject selfishness, and sacrificing one’s self for the good and 
the general welfare of the whole. This is our oum beloved 
country ; the model of fraternal organizations, based on 
natural justice and equality. Therefore our untiring zeal 
should be, to preserve in its entire integrity the salutary 
principle of the perfect and absolute equality of rights of 
all citizens and States — from which emanate all private 
and public liberty, all individual and national felicity. We 
should not permit attacks from any quarter upon the sole, 
legitmate sovereignity — that of the people; nor the sus¬ 
pension of its exercise for any cause whatever; nor a sub- 



33 


stitution of any domination, whether temporal or spiritual; 
nor should we bend the knee to any master, save the Al¬ 
mighty. To do so is to renounce for ourselves and our chil¬ 
dren. all true dignity and equality ; to prostrate ourselves 
upon the ruins of society at the feet of despotism ; to betray 
the sacred cause of right and humanity ; to deny the hal¬ 
lowed name of country. The stall, where beasts of service 
eat and sleep, cannot be one’s country. 

This patriotic devotion to one’s country, in all ages, and 
amid all nations, has been the inspiring theme of bards and 
orators; it has made the animated marble speak, and the 
breathing canvass glow in mute omnipotence; it has be¬ 
queathed to immortal memory names that cannot die, and 
deeds that consecrate the spots where lie inurned the holo¬ 
causts of liberty. For this, the noble Cato shed his own 
heart’s blood, rather than behold any longer the national 
degradation of his country, which he might be said to have 
loved with a religious adoration: for his purity and patriot¬ 
ism, like Egypt’s Pyramids, towered sublimely amid an 
almost universal desolation. For this, the last of the Grac- 
chii expired, whose scattered dust toward Heaven gave birth 
to a Marius, less distinguished for having exterminated the 
Cimbri, than for having prostrated forever the aristocracy of 
the Patrician nobility, beneath whose blows the heroic sons 
of Cornelia fell. For this, Codrus, the last of the Athenian 
Kings, and the patriotic Deceii, voluntarily immolated their 
lives. When was it that the Athenians became the protec¬ 
tors of Greece, and appeared the most patriotic and formid¬ 
able? It was when Xerxes, with his Persian millions, had 
invaded their country; consigning their houses and posses¬ 
sions to the flames of the enemy, and transfering their 
wives, their children, their aged parents, and the symbols of 
their religion, on board of their fleet, they considered them¬ 
selves as the Republic, and their fleet as their country, and 
then struck that terrible blow at Salamis, under which the 
greatness of Persia sunk forever. When was it the Romans 
appeared at once the most terrible and invincible? “ It was 
when seventy thousand of their sons lay bleeding at Cannae, 
and Hannibal, victorious over three Roman armies and 
twenty nations, was thundering at the gates of their imperial 
city.” It was then, swearing on their swords in the pres¬ 
ence of the fathers of the Republic, never to despair of it, 
they marched forth with the patriotic determination to con¬ 
quer or to die. From this resolution, the power and glory of 
Carthage evanished forever. 

But why should we roam abroad to find examples of a 
religious love of liberty —■ of patriotic devotion to one’s coun¬ 
try ? Immortal sires of our Revolution ! Your Declaration 
3 


34 


of Independence gave new birth to liberty, inaugurating at 
once a new era and a new world. Thus suspending your¬ 
selves between magnificence and ruin, with a patriotism 
that no temptations of earth could seduce, you dashed from 
your lips the poisoned chalice of European despotism, and 
spurned her crowns and principalities as you did the haugh¬ 
ty legions with which she sought to intimidate you. Amid 
all the vicissitudes of your seven years’ conflict, you dis¬ 
played a love of liberty that defied all misfortune, and 
patriotism that gave new grace to victory. Washington 
and Jackson, Scott, Taylor, and Harrison, at Concord and 
Lexington, upon the Thames and the Brandywine, at New 
Orleans and in Mexico — for their country, you and your 
children have fought and bled ! Hamilton, Madison and 
Franklin, Rutledge, Jay, and Jefferson, Webster, Clay, and 
Calhoun — your wisdom and patriotism are the land-marks 
of the nation — its imperishable monuments forever. Amer¬ 
ican heroes and patriots, your race is the last and noblest of 
time. Yes, my countrymen— 

“The first four acts already past, 

A fifth shall close the drama of the day; 

Time's noblest offspring is the last .” 

These reflections have been forced upon us from the 
exalted position which a mysterious Providence has assigned 
us among the nations of the earth, and from the alarming 
dangers that are gathering and thickening all around about 
us, both at home and abroad. Look to the distant heavens; 
upon the horizon lowers a storm-cloud from agitated Eu¬ 
rope—a fearful combination of potent States against us— 
England and France, Austria and Spain. The latter, the 
miserable instrument of provocation and menaced ven¬ 
geance. Look into your own bosom ; you feel already the 
tremblings of a quiescent volcano — civil disorders, sectional 
animosities, national disruption. Do you doubt the Euro¬ 
pean combination against us? It has been announced upon 
the floors of the British Parliament by Lord Clarendon; 
echoed by the London Times, the mouth piece of the British 
Ministry; it has been insinuated by the Emperor, and the 
Press of France; it has been proclaimed by Senator Cass 
in our own Congress — by our Ministers to France, England, 
and Spain ; and it has been confirmed by the direct inter¬ 
ference of their Consuls and Ministers in our Diplomatic 
negotiations with China, the Sandwich Isles, Central Amer¬ 
ica, the West India Islands, and Spain. Even now, from the 
waters of Havana, the bristled cannon of their combined 
fleet indirectly point to our shores. How shall we weather 
this storm, that threatens from abroad ? How shall we 
extinguish the volcanic elements that are gathering within 
eur own bosom ? 


35 


Citizens of Tennessee, if there ever was a time when such 
illustrious examples of an ardent love of liberty and patriotic 
devotion to country could inspire us above ordinary men, it is 
even now. Foreign influence has attempted abroad to th wart 
our expansion, prosperity, and power. Foreign influence 
has employed at home every means to produce a national 
disruption, by sowing all seeds of civil discord, and foment¬ 
ing mutual distrust and sectional alienation. Our only, sal¬ 
vation lies in the stalwa t arms and patriotic bosoms of united 
Native Americans. Native Americans, do you rule America, 
or are you and your destinies in the hands of strangers to 
your institutions — foreigners by birth ? Look at your diplo¬ 
matic corps abroad — to your army, navy, and Federal offices 
at home. You are becoming politically proscribed. A 
French Red Republican was sent to Spain — an Austrian 
Jew to Holland — an Irish Fillibuster to Portugal-—an Eng¬ 
lish Socialist to Naples ; while a Roman Catholic has been 
appointed to a seat in the Cabinet, arid another is Chief Jus¬ 
tice of the United States. Your Merchant’s Marine consists 
of 112,000 seamen — of these one-third are foreigners; your 
Navy of over 8,000 sailors — of these one-fourth are foreign¬ 
ers: your Army, over 10,000 officers and soldiers — of these 
7,000 are foreigners; your officers in the various depart¬ 
ments of the General Government in 1854, amounted to 
natives 982— foreigners 3,321 ! # 

Americans! you ask yourselves why all this? We will 
tell you, and let the solmen truth sink down deep into your 
hearts. The Foreign vote and influence now hold the bal¬ 
ance of power in our government, and they have elected 
every President of the United States since 183G. The for¬ 
eign vote in 1838 amounted to 150,000, and Martin Van 
Buren, who received it, was elected over all opposition by 
25,413 ; in 1840 it amounted to 200,000, and Harrison’s ma¬ 
jority over Van Buren was 146,000; in 1844 it amounted to 
250,000, and Polk’s majority over Clay was 38,801 ; in 1848 
the foreign vote was 325,000, and Taylor’s majority over 
Cass 39,605 ; in 1852 it was 400,000, and Pierce’s majority 
over Scott was 202,679. In 1856 the foreign vote will in¬ 
crease to 600,000. According to the Census Report the 
foreign vote in 1850 amounted to 372,000, while there were 
372,000 foreigners additional, capable of voting. Thus to 
conciliate this foreign vote and influence, the true lords of the 
manor and their children, have been driven from their inher- 


* This last statement, as to the “ departments of the General Govern* 
iKiant,” is taken from the leading American Journals. It is denied by the 
Washington Union, but its contradiction is no proof that the statement is 
mot true, for the Union is one of the bitterest enemies of the Order, 



36 


itance, and its possession and government are rapidly being 
transferred to the hands of strangers. This has been the 
vortex and sepulchre of nations; and unless we at once 
rush to our country’s rescue, its declination will be as rapid 
as its ascension. 

But alas, the character ot 'this foreign population ! This 
brings us to our concluding remarks upon this topic. We 
have spoken of .its pauperism, let us now speak of its 
crime and its ignorance. 

The total number of persons convicted for the various 
offences in the United States during the year ending in 1850, 
were of natives 12,855— foreigners 13,091; and this not¬ 
withstanding our native population was seven times greater 
than the foreign. According to the Census Report, for vari¬ 
ous offences there were confined in the jails and penitentia¬ 
ries of the States during the same time, of every 10,000 
natives, 1,882 ; of every 10,000 foreigners, 6,690. To prove 
most conclusively that crime , like pauperism, ever dogs the 
heels of our foreign population, we will instance a few 
States in which it most abounds. The number of criminals 
convicted in 1850 were in Illinois, of natives 127 — foreign¬ 
ers 189 ; Maine, natives 284 — of foreigners 460 ; in Massa¬ 
chusetts, of natives 3,366 — of foreigners 3,884; in New 
York, of natives 3,962 — of foreigners 6.317; in Louisiana, 
of natives 197 — of foreigners 100; in Missouri, of natives 
242 — of foreigners 666. New-York in the North and Mis¬ 
souri in the South have had the greatest sectional amount 
of foreign population. 

The ignorance of our foreign population we will next 
briefly consider. There were in the United States in 1850, 
foreigners who could neither read nor write, over the age of 
twenty , 195.114 ; at present, 225,000 ; and under this age and 
over five years, 400,000. In Connecticut there were of 
natives 4,013 — of foreigners 5,235; in Maine, of natives 
4,149 — of foreigners 6,282; in Rhode Island, of natives 
1,217 — of foreigners 2.359; in Massachusetts, of natives 
1,861 —of foreigners 26,484 ; in New-York, of natives 30,- 
670 — of foreigners 68,052. We might proceed with other 
statistical information relative to the foreign blind, deaf, dumb, 
insane, and idiotic — the annual cost of these, and foreign 
paupers, and convicts, and inmates of jails, penitentiaries 
and almshouses, to the people of the United States; but 
what we have already exhibited ought to suffice to convince 
the most skeptical of the imminent dangers which threaten 
our country. Are these degraded and ignorant persons com¬ 
petent to understand and appreciate our constitution, insti¬ 
tutions, and the genius of our government? It is impossible. 
Who, therefore, can doubt the propriety of our Order’s refu* 


37 


sal to permit them to exercise the elective franchise, or to 
hold any office under the jurisdiction of the States or Fed¬ 
eral Government ? We con less that there are exceptional 
instances, of foreigners who are highly educated — gentle¬ 
men of moral, social, and even national worth. But they 
are lamentably few, and cannot adequately compensate for 
the demoralization, ignorance, degradation and destitution 
of an overwhelming majority. A still greater objection to 
this population is, that sixty per cent of the males are over 
20 years old, and forty-nine per cent of the females are over 
19 years of age. Again, the Census Report states on page 
120, that our foreign population almost universally inter¬ 
marry among themselves; and associating exclusively 
among themselves for a long length ol time, they are separ¬ 
ated from our native population in clans, both in the cities 
and the country — at once preserving their foreign idiosyn- 
cracies of character, language, and nationality. France, 
England, Ireland, Germany, Russia, and Spain, have their 
foreign supporters and sympathizers within our country. 
This will ever prevent homogeniousness of character, union 
and nationality, among our citizens. 

Americans! These evils must be immediately remedied, 
or our glorious America will be lost amid the ruins of rev¬ 
olutions, or swallowed up by a fearful vottex of civil dis¬ 
ruptions. Let me conjure you, by the most hallowed recol¬ 
lections of the past, by the most glorious anticipations of the 
future, once more lay aside your sectional and political ani¬ 
mosities, lor the overpowering cause in which we are em¬ 
barked. Remember, the contest is for our children, our 
county, and our God. Remember, the day which shall once 
more unite all free Native Americans, shall be held in all 
time as another birthday of American Constitutional Lib¬ 
erty-— when upon another mid-morn another sun shall rise 
in unfading splendor. Then may we hope, when European 
and Asiatic despotisms, with all their columps and triumphs, 
with all their crescents and crowns, shall have mouldered 
into dust, civilization , rising upon her Olympian wings, shall 
still shine in the sky of a Franklin, and “glory rekindle at 
the urn of a Washington,” Then shall pure religion and 
popular liberty walk abroad in the ubiquity of their benev¬ 
olence ; for their bounds will be the extremities of creation. 
Americans, trust in yourselves — trust in the God of your 
fathers; for there is a “Divinity that will shape our ends, 
rough hew them as we may.” 

Below, I submit to you the reflections of Washington and 
Jefferson. Those of Gen Washington, the first, in a letter 
addressed to Governeur Morris, dated White Plains, July 
24, 1778: 

, f Baron Steuben, I now find, is also wanting to quit his 


38 


inspectorship, for a command in the line. This will be pro¬ 
ductive of much discontent. In a word, though I think the 
Baron an excellent officer. I do most devoutly wish we had 
not a single foreigner amongst us except the Marquis de 
Lafayette, who acts upon very different principles from those 
which govern the rest.” 

From another, dated Philadelphia, November 17, 1794, 
and addressed to John Adams, the elder: 

“ My opinion with respect to immigration is, except of 
useful mechanics, and some particular descriptions of men 
and professions, there is no need of encouragement.” 

A letter dated from his residence, January 20, 1790, in 
reply to a letter applying for office, has this passage : 

“It does not accord With the policy of this government, to 
bestow offices, civil or military, upon foreigners, to the ex¬ 
clusion of our citizens.” 

Those of Mr. Jefferson may be found in his “Notes on 
Virginia.” 

“ Civil government being the sole object of forming socie¬ 
ties, its administration must be conducted by common con¬ 
sent. Every species of government has its specific princi¬ 
ples. Ours are more peculiar than those of any other in the 
universe. It is a composition of the freest principles of the 
English constitution, with others derived from natural right, 
or natural reason. To these nothing can be more opposed 
than the maxims of absolute monarchies. Yet from such 
we are to expect the greatest number of immigrants. They 
will bring with them the principles of the government's they 
leave, imbibed in their early youth ; or, if able to throw 
them off, it will be in exchange for an unboundtd licentious¬ 
ness, passing, as is uvual, from one extreme to another . It 
would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point 
of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, 
they will transmit to their children. 

“In proportion to their numbers, they will share with u% 
in the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp 
and bias its direction, and render it a heterogeneous, inco¬ 
herer t, distracted mass. 1 may appeal to experience during 
the present contest, for a verification of these conjectures. 
But, if they be not certain in event, are they not possible, 
are they not. probable ? Is it not safer to wait with patience 
twenty-seven years and three months longer for the attain¬ 
ment of any degree of population desired, or expected? 
May not our government be more homogeneous , more peacea¬ 
ble, more durable V 

The next topic of discussion will be the relative position 
of our organization with the political and religious parties 
and denominations of the day. I am 


AN AMERICAN. 


so 


NO. IX. 

Religious Liberty — The American Parly vindicated against the charges 

of Intolerance and Proscription. 

Gentlemen : We promised in our last article to devote this 
to the discussion of the position of the American party on 
the question of religious liberty. To do this effectually, we 
must recur to the language and spirit of the Constitution of 
the United States, and the State of Tennessee: for both of 
these we are solemnly obliged faithfully to observe. 

First . The Constitution of the United States declares, in 
Article 1st of its Amendments — “That Congress shall make 
no law respecting an establishment of religion ; or prohibit¬ 
ing the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of 
speech, or of the press.” This is all it has to say upon this 
topic. Did the American party, or any portion of it, ever 
ash of Congress to pass a law respecting an establishment of 
any religion; or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; 
or abridging the freedom of religious speech, or of 
the press? They have never done so, nor could they 
meditate such a thing.' Because they are solemnly sworn to 
oppose any amalgamation of Church and State, and forever 
to defend the freedom of conscience , of worship , of speech , 
and of the press . Thus, the American party, instead of 
violating any portion of the Constitution, pledge their honor 
and life to maintain it in its spirit and letter. 

Secondly. The Constitution of the State of Tennessee 
declares, Sec. 3, Art. 1st — “That all men have a natural 
and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to 
the dictates of their own conscience ; that no man can be 
compelled to attend , erect or support any place of worship, or 
to maintain any minister against his consent; that no human 
authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with 
the rights of conscience ; and that no preference by law shall 
ever be given to any religious establishment or mode of 
worship.” Again, Sec. 4th—“That no religious test shall 
ever be required as a qualification to any office or public 
trust under this State.” This, also, is all that our State Con¬ 
stitution says upon this subject. We submit to every mem¬ 
ber of the American party in the State of Tennessee, if he 
is not bound by every consideration of honor and patriotism 
to maintain each and all of these requirements of the Con¬ 
stitution of the Slate of Tennessee? Why are we so im¬ 
placably opposed to the “Higher Law” party of Northern 
Abolitionists, of which Wrn. H. Seward is the head and front? 
Because they have attempted to influence the issue of elec¬ 
tions, and the decision of purely political questions, by bring- 


ing to bear the power of ecclesiastical denominations and 
religious fanaticism; because, instead of the plain language 
of laws and constitutions, and the decisions of Supreme 
Courts, they have erected over these, as ultimate tribunals 
of superior obligation , their own private, moral , and religious 
rights of conscience and judgment. Why is it that our 
party are opposed to Roman Catholics? Because we sin¬ 
cerely believe, that the very spirit and soul of their Church 
polity, as well from its experimental illustration in other 
nations, as in our own, are opposed to these fundamental 
requirements of our State Constitution; because, behind the 
supreme and ultimate tribunals of our constitutions and laws, 
upon mere civil and political questions, they have erected, as 
of primary and paramount obligations, the dicta of Priests, 
or the adjudications of their ecclesiastical or Fapal authori¬ 
ties. 

In addition to what we have already said, in Article sixth, 
explanatory of our position on the question of religious lib¬ 
erty, we will add the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth Arti¬ 
cles of our creed, published semi -officially in our metropoli¬ 
tan paper a Washington, “ The American Organ.” They 
are as follows: 

Sixth. “We shall oppose, now and hereafter, any “union 
of Church and State” no matter what class of religionists 
shall seek to bring about such union. 

Seventh. “We shall vigorously maintain the vesttd rights 
of all persons, of native or foreign birth, and shall at all 
times oppose the slightest interference with such vested 
rights. 

Eighth. “ We shall oppose and protest against all abridg¬ 
ment of religious liberty, holding it as a cardinal maxim, t hat 
religious faith is a question between each individual and his 
God, and over which no political government, or other hu¬ 
man power, can rightfully exercise any supervision or con¬ 
trol. at any time, in any place, or in any form. 

Ninth . “ We shall oppose all ‘higher law* doctrines,by 

which the constitution is to be set at naught, violated, or 
disregarded, whether by politicians , by religionists . or by the 
adherents or followers of either, or by any other class of 
persons.” 

We are denounced as proscriptive , because we do not ad¬ 
mit to membership Roman Catholics ; and because we are 
opposed to their election or appointment to offices of trust 
and honor, within the limit or under (he juiisdiction of any 
or all of the United States. Our association is a voluntary 
one, and like the Free Masons, Odd Fellows, Sons of Tem¬ 
perance, and analagous societies, we have the right to admit 
whom we please. Again, at the last Democratic State Con- 


41 


vention, held in the State Capitol, for the purpose of nomi¬ 
nating a candidate for the Gubernatorial chair, there were 
passed resolutions establishing a Secret Central State Execu¬ 
tive Committee , with subordinate county committees. Why is 
it, that the Democratic party will not permit any Whig to 
become a member of these secret Executive Committees? 
Because they wish to conceal from their opponents, the 
Whigs, their secret plan of organization, by which they can 
most successfully and efficiently conduct the canvass, and 
elect the candidates of their choice. Hence, to admit the 
Whigs, their opponents, to membership in their Executive 
Committees, would be to defeat all the objects for which they 
were instituted. For these reasons was the American party 
secretly organized, and do they reject, from membership their 
opponents, the Roman Catholics, if the one is objectionable 
and proscriptive , so is the other. But these committees are 
alike common to all political parties, and are almost coeval 
with the formation of our government. 

Again, every good Catholic, once annually at least, is 
obliged to confess to his Priest , Bishop or Archbishop. Should 
he be asked by the priest, during the progress of his disclo¬ 
sures, if he were a member of the American party — what 
were its distinctive features — its plan of organization, or 
whom its candidates for office, he is bound by his church 
obligations to reveal all these things, or be anathematized. 
The priest, he believes, has the power not only to ahstdre his 
obligations and oaths of honor and patriotism, but also to 
remit all his sins. Thus to admit Catholics to our Order is 
but to defeat the attainment of all of its salutary objects. 
Again, we will not vote for or appoint Catholics to office, 
because when installed in office they swear to support the 
Constitution of the United States, as the fundamental and su¬ 
preme law of the land ; and this they do with the mental 
reservation of a superior allegiance to their church and its 
ecclesiastical authorities. This is, in civil or political 
affairs, elevating the church upon the ruins of the State, and 
for legal and constitutional obligations, a substitution of 
ecclesiastical prerogative and Papal domination. Again, 
why do Whigs vote for and appoint to office Whigs rather 
than Democrats ? Because they so wish. Why do Catholics 
and naturalized foreigners oppose us, and refuse to vote for a 
Native American for any office? Because they so wish. 
Now, have not the members of the American party the same 
right to vote for whom they wish? What constitutional 
obligation is any citizen of these United States under to 
vote for Catholics rather than Protestants—foreigners by 
birth rather than Native Americans? I answer, none. 
Then why call it proscriptive because a Native A.merican 


42 


votes for whom he pleases for office, a right which every 
freeman in America enjoys? Whig and Democratic parties 
vote for, and appoint to office, only the members of their own 
parties. Have not the American party the same right ? 0, 

“ do not , as some ungracious pastors do, show us the steep 
and thorny way to Heaven, whilst like pujfed and reckless 
libertines they, themselves, the primrose path of dalliance 
tread,” and practice not the precepts which they teach. 

It is not the religious faith of the Catholics to which we 
are opposed, but their church polity and its tendencies. With 
the same pertinacity would we oppose any Protestant de¬ 
nomination whose hierarchical tendencies were analagous. 
We cannot be charged with being a religious bigot — a 
wretch whom no philosophy can humanize, no charity soften, 
no religion reclaim, no miracle convert. We belong to no 
religious sect, but we would preserve religion pure as the 
immaculate source from which it emanates. “ The union of 
Church and State only converts good Christians into bad 
statesmen, and political knaves into pretended Christians. 
It is at best but a foul and adulterous connection, polluting 
the purity of Heaven with the abominations of earth, and 
hanging the tatters of a political piety upon the cross of an 
insulted Savior. The hands that hold her chalice should be 
pure, and the priests of her temple should be as spotless as 
the vestments of their ministry.” 

Thus much just now, we have deemed necessary, prepar¬ 
atory to the main argument in our subsequent articles, the 
chain of which we wish not to be interrupted, as it will be 
more elaborate and historical. For these we beg a careful 
and thoughtful consideration. 

Before Heaven, we do not cherish for any religious denom¬ 
ination the least degree of unkind feeling. The same laud¬ 
able motives now prompt us, that impelled us,when in mant¬ 
ling youth, beneath the ensigns armorial of the Republic, 
we bared our bosom to the rude thunder shocks of battle. 
All we seek is the boon denied to none—to emulate the 
deeds of our noble ancestry, that we too, when we die, may 
repose beneath the same evergreens of immortal memory 
which national gratitude has planted in the bosoms of our 
children. ’Tis laudable to serve one’s country. 

As the American party in this State have no official organ , 
they tender through me, the official exponent of their creed, 
their grateful acknowledgements to the public press for the 
publicity which they have given to this series of articles, 
lam ‘ AN AMERICAN. 


43 


NO. X. 

The Government of the United Slates is founded on the Eternal Principle* 
of Human and Divine Justice—All Religious Power and Authority 
arc Constitutionally separated from all Political — This complete separ¬ 
ation of Religious from Political Power is the peculiarly distinguish¬ 
ed feature of American Republicanism, for in no other Government ha* 
it ever existed — The History of all Nations proves that a union of Po¬ 
litical with Religious Power and Authority is dangerous to Popular Lib¬ 
erty and promotive of Despotism. 

Gentlemen: We solicit your thoughtful consideration of 
our historical argument, to demonstrate the three proposi¬ 
tions which we announced in the close of our last communi¬ 
cation :—First: That the Government of the United States 
is the only one that ever existed , in which all religions power 
and authority are separated from all political — the Church 
from the State — in all their varied departments and details. 
Secondly: That the Roman Catholic Church is a cunningly 
devised, admixture of Paganism, Christianity, and political 
Despotism. Thirdly: That the union of the Church and 
State —of the religious and the political authority— in the 
organization of governments, has invariably led to the usur¬ 
pation of the rights of the people — to national corruption, 
degradation and ruin. 

In relation to the first proposition, his true, that, when our 
constitutional form of government was adopted, for the first 
time in the world’s history was announced the birth-day of 
a nation, which based the foundations of its government 
upon the eternal and immutable principles of human and 
divine justice — that recognized in all civil power the indis¬ 
putable sovereignty of the people—in all divine authority 
the undivided sovereignty of the Almighty; that tore away 
from between each citizen and the p oplc, the legitimate source 
of all sovereign power, all former intermediate obstructions 
of kings, nobles, and aristocratical classes — that tore away 
from between the aspirations of the human heart and its 
God, the holy object of its sublime adoration, all interven¬ 
ing obstacles, of temporal Popes and Potentates, of mitred 
Bishops and Priests. O, happy, proud America! you have 
rendered unto God the “ things that are God's;” and may thy 
people be the happiest — thy reign the noblest of time! 
May ages on ages ever thy splendor unfold ! In this histor¬ 
ical argument we are obliged to avoid all collateral points, 
and lengthened details, and confine ourselves strictly to a 
comprehensive but condensed analysis of the organic struc¬ 
tures of all governments. We shall, therefore, commence 
with the most ancient. 


44 


In ascending the acclivities of time to the twilight of au¬ 
thenticated history, the first regularly organized government 
that emerges from all poetical and mythical obscurity, is 
ancient Egypt. This was a government decidedly of castes , 
of which the most predominant were those of the warriors 
and Priests. The Priests prescribed all forms and ceremo¬ 
nies. for every important action, which even the haughtiest 
King dared not violate. As the stars were consulted on all 
momentous occasions, and the Priestly Astrologers possessed 
the exclusive right to interpret their omens and deliver their 
oracles, this gave to them paramount control over all public 
and private affairs. The Priestly caste held the Kings and 
the people in awe of their displeasure, even after death ; 
for they alone formed that fearful tribunal that determined 
whether the dead bodies even of Kings merited embalming 
and a mausoleum, or should be cast away for loathsome 
dec iy. The first usurper of the royal throne of the Pha¬ 
raohs, was the Priest Sethos, who, at the head of an army of 
undisciplined laborers and artificers, expelled from the con¬ 
fines of Egypt the renowned Assyrian conqueror, Senachet ib. 
The established religion of Egypt was Paganism, and it was 
intimately interwoven with all the various departments of 
the civil authority. Here, priestly domination united with 
royal usurpation, in the universal saciilice of the people’s 
rights. Yes, Egypt, thy colossal statues and solemn tem¬ 
ples, thy catacombs, labyrinths, and lofty pyramids, are the 
eternal monuments of thy ancient grandeur and shame. 
For they were erected upon the ruins of the people, and were 
wrung from the toil, sweat, and sacrificed lives of millions. 

’I'was here, ill-fated Israel, that thy children drank the 
bitter dregs of an unmitigated servitude. Modern differs 
from ancient Egypt but little ; for whether as a Viceroyalty 
of Turkey, or as an independent nationality, whether Pagan¬ 
ism or Mahometanism be the prevailing national religion, 
all civil and religious authority is blended, and the sove¬ 
reignty of the people is usurped. 

India, Persia, Syria, Assyria, and Media — the Persian, 
Assyrian, and Babylonian Empires; we have grouped to¬ 
gether the ancient history of these, from the striking analogy 
of their forms of government — their political and religious 
institutions. For whether as separate kingdoms, or united 
under overshadowing Empires, over all, despotism in its 
most rampant form was established—the civil and religious 
authority blended, and the slavery of the people rendered 
complete. The Kings were regarded as the heads of the 
Church and State, and very frequently claimed of their na¬ 
tions divine homage. Their will was the supreme law of 
the land, and the only countervailing order that existed to 


45 


restrict their judgment or resist their decrees, was that of 
the Priests, who, however, always seemed identified with 
the throne. These Priests, called Chaldeans, like those of 
the Jews and Egyptians, were a hereditary order. Their 
Idolatry was of Samian character; for they worshiped the 
sun, moon, and stars. Besides, they deified mortals, whom 
they supposed connected with these celestial luminaries, and 
they called them, as the Eastern monarchs of the present 
day are called, “ Brothers of the Sun and Moon.” The peo¬ 
ple, who were extremely depraved and superstitious, were 
the veriest slaves of these Chaldean Priests and Jugglers. 
This sacerdotal order, which in Media and Persia was called 
that of the Magi , was much reformed by Zoroaster. Yet, 
through their sooth-sayers and sages they ruled here in the 
courts of royalty — there in the judicial tribunals of State. 
Their order and power extended from celestial China through 
interior Asia, to Northern Africa, and Eastern Europe : and 
such were their potency that the most powerful monarchs, 
as Cambyses, Cyrus and Darius, could not extirpate them. 
They were ambitious and usurping, for it was these Priests 
that elevated the pretender, Smyrdis, upon the throne of 
Persia. 

The Carthagenian form of government was analagous to 
that of the Phoenicians, their ancestors. It was based on 
Paganism, and distinguished for its sanguinary rites, and 
bloody, human sacrifices. Here, too, there existed a sacer¬ 
dotal order, whose priestly functions were united with the 
magisterial — the religious with political power, to enslave 
the people. 

Thibet, Mongolia, Bucharia, China, India, Tartary, and 
Cashmere, in their governmental organisms, present a strik¬ 
ing similitude. Lama ism, a species of idolatry or theocracy, 
extending to all temporal as well as spiritual affairs, formed 
the basis of their imperial governments. The Grand Lama, 
who resided at Patoli in Thibet, in a gorgeous palace sur¬ 
rounded by 20,000 craven priests, was the Papal God , or vis¬ 
ible Deity. This religion, ’tis said, has existed for three 
thousand years , and is the prototype of the Roman Catholic. 
For history records the fact, that when the first Catholic 
missionary penetrated Thibet, and witnessed its imposing 
ceremonial, he exclaimed, “that the Devil had instituted 
there an imitation of the rites of the Catholic Church that 
he might more effectually destroy the souls of men.” The 
Priests of Lamaism, like those of Catholicism, for money, 
offered alms and prayers for the dead — their Bishops wore 
mitres , and their Priests used beads— they used, too, the 
holy water , and had a singing service — they, too, had a vast 
number of convents filled with lazy monks and friars; and 


46 


had confessors chosen for royal personages, or superior offi¬ 
cers of State. Here. too. as in all Catholic countries, Bish¬ 
ops and Priests united their religious with political despotism 
to degrade and enslave the people. In the magnificent pal¬ 
ace, at Pekin, of the celestial Emperor of China, might be 
seen entertained the Nuncio of the Grand Lama of Thibet 

Greece or the Hellenic States — their political organiza¬ 
tions were all based upon Paganism; and their religion was 
the bond of their common nationality. Its elements were 
said to have been of Asiatic and Egyptian origin, but ren¬ 
dered extremely beautiful and sublime by the fascinating 
fictions of their poets, especially Homer and Hesiod. Almost 
every action of their lives, whether private or public, was 
accompanied with religious rites, while the voice of oracles 
was heard every where, and omens and diviners were found 
in all places. The functions of civil authority were hal¬ 
lowed by religious ceremonies; and all their celebrated na¬ 
tional games were intimately identified with their establish¬ 
ed religion. The oracles of Dodona and Delphi — the tem¬ 
ples of Olympia and Delos — were national. The most dis¬ 
tinguished national oracle was that of Delphi, which, with 
its Priests , was under the control of the Federal Amphic- 
f.yonic Council. By the influence of this oracle and its 
Priests, this National Council regulated the federal affairs of 
the States, and superintended the administration of the Laws 
of Nations. Here, too, cunning Priests were ever ready, 
by bribes , to administer to lawless ambition, avarice, and 
usurpation. 

Rome, whether as a monarchy, republic, or empire — 
whether ruled by Kings, Senates, Councils, Decemvirs, Mili¬ 
tary Tribunes, Dictators, or Emperors — still had its form of 
government based on paganism, as the established religion* 
When the Roman Empire had attained its zenith of splen¬ 
dor, Rome contained 420 temples, crowded with an infinite 
variety of Divinities. Every Divinity had its troupe of 
sacerdotal servants or Priests , through whom, upon every 
occasion, however important or trivial, the oracles of the 
gods were consulted. No General ever dared to march 
against an enemy, unless assured by priestly soothsayers that 
the omens were propitious. The Kings of Rome possessed 
priestly with royal prerogatives. Numa, the second King 
of Rome, under the fabled supervision of the goddess Egeria, 
first systematized the civil and religious forms of govern¬ 
ment. Their sacrifices at times were extremely supersti¬ 
tious and repulsive. The ancient Romans, like the modern , 
(who ascribe to the Pope authority belonging only to God,) 
deified men; for Virgil informs us that Augustus, as did 
Nebuchadnezzar, procured altars to be erected, and sacri- 


47 


frees to be offered to him. Caius, surnamed Caligula, whose 
sanguinary caprices knew no bounds, erected a temple to 
himself, and instituted a College of Priests to superintend 
his worship. Pie could have as easily procured Priests to 
reverence his celebrated horse, Incitatus, which he frequent¬ 
ly dined at his imperial table, on gilt oats, and costly wines 
drank from jeweled goblets. Roman Priests , then as now f 
were ever ready to obey the absuid and sanguinary behests 
of Potentates — ever allied against the people. Rome and 
its history, after the establishment of Christianity in the em¬ 
pire, belong to a modern age, of which we are not now 
speaking. 

Apotheosis was common among many nations. The Ethio- 
peans, regarded all their Kings as Gods ; theValeda of the 
ancient Germans, the Janus of the Hungarians, the Thaut, 
Woden and Assa,of the Northern Nomadic tribes, were doubt¬ 
less men the most renowned of their day and generation. The 
government of the ancient Gauls, Britons, and Germans, 
was politico-religious. Druidism was their national religion, 
and the Druids or Priests, in many respects, resembled the 
Bramins of India. These Priests being chosen from the most 
noble families, associating the honors of birth with the 
highest religious functions, commanded of the people the 
greatest veneration. They were the interpreters of religion, 
and judges in all civil affairs ; and whoever disobeyed them 
was declared as impious and accursed. At the head of these 
Priests stood the Maximus Pontifex , or High Priest, whose 
authority was absolute; for he commanded, decreed, and 
punished, at pleasure. We are told by Julius Caesar, in his 
Commentaries, that the Druids on some occasions offered 
human sacrifices. In their religious ceremonies, they wore 
an ornament about the necks encased with gold, which was 
called the Druid’s egg. Among all these rude nations, the 
religious and the civil authority was blended, to stultify and 
enslave the people. 

The Plebrewis the last ancient nation of which we will 
speak. The form of their government was a Theocracy. 
If we are permitted so to speak, the Almighty was their 
King — the High Priest or Judge, his Minister of State—the 
Princes and Elders his Legislators. The latter, who consti¬ 
tuted the National Legislative Assembly, could not impose 
taxes upon the people, for this was the prerogative of the 
High Priest, directed by God ; nor could they enact laws un- 
sanctioned by the people. For the people, not only in their 
primitive assemblies sometimes pioposed laws, but they 
would have repealed, by petition, those enacted, which to 
the nation were exceptionable. Josephus supposed from 
these facts, that this was a mixed Aristocratic and Democra- 


48 


tic government. Under the Judge or High Priest, Samuel, 
the people demanded a King, and as it was a virtual rejec¬ 
tion of the Almighty, he gave them Saul in his wrath. Frorfi 
this peiiod to the subjugation of the Jews by the Homans, 
there was a gradual departure from the original features of 
their Theocratic government, and an approximation to ec¬ 
clesiastical and political despotism. 

Thus have the various forms of government of all the 
nations of antiquity, of the least note, passed under our 
vivid review; and we now stand upon the grand vestibule of 
the Modern World , with all of its varied States and diversi¬ 
fied institutions looming up before us in the distant prospec¬ 
tive. But as an analytical investigation of the organic struc¬ 
tures of their government will be more appropriately em¬ 
braced in the discussion of our last two propositions, we will 
now dismiss them witha few general remarks. Whether 
amid the putrid despotisms of Asia and Africa, with now and 
then an obscure ray of a higher order of a Christian civiliza¬ 
tion ; or whether amid the various governments of Europe— 
here with established national churches, as in Italy, Spain, 
Portugal, Austria, Russia, Norway, Sweden, Turkey, and 
Great Rritian — or there by prevailing national religions, a* 
in France, Germany, and Prussia — everywhere Christianity 
or religion by some means or in some way has become the 
most potent auxiliary of despotic administration — is allied 
with civil power to enslave the people, and deny their ina¬ 
lienable rights. Thou. Genius of civil and religious Liberty , 
alone in our happy America, after six thousand years of 
roaming, canst thou find a resting place for thy wearied 
wing ! Here, alone, canst thou rest thy sacred Ark that 
contains the germs of a new world, and of a superior gen¬ 
eration. Like the last Mountain in the deluge, America 
sublimely towers, thy first and last resting place amid a 
world in ruins! 

Before we bid a long farewell to the ancient nations of 
the old world, let us for a few minutes linger upon their 
horizon, that we may educe out of their chaos, some solemn 
truths that may serve as practical lessons in oar future ca¬ 
reer. We discover nowhere among ancient nations either 
a recognition of the sovereign rights of the people, or a 
separation of the Church or religion, from the State ; but 
everywhere, through Priests or sacerdotal orders , religiqn 
employed as the handmaid of political despotism. We see 
everywhere, these orders of Priests enlarging and establish¬ 
ing their power by all the expedients of an ambitious pol¬ 
icy— aspiring to a permanent guardianship over nations not 
only in sacred but in worldly affairs: and to this end, sur¬ 
charging then as now religion, with heterogenous addition* 


49 


veiling the minds of the people by superstition , substituting 
authority for free investigation , the terrors of penal power 
and excommunication, for conviction , usurping the monopoly 
of the sciences, and with this, the administration of the 
State—employing the vocation of Magic, and even mira¬ 
cles, as at present, to debase and plunder the people; and 
in an aggrandizing and selfish manner appropriating to them¬ 
selves all the advantages of civil union without participa¬ 
ting in its burdens. 

History, thou faithful chronicler of the past, show me one 
solitary nation since the establishment of the Roman Catho¬ 
lic Church, in which it was the established religion, where 
its Pope, its Bishops, or its Priests were the champions of 
the sovereign rights of the people — where they were not 
allied with political despotism to forge the chains of the 
people — where they did not trample upon, plunder, degrade 
and enslave the people ! Ah ! thou canst not, faithful pens- 
man, thou canst not. 

This brings us to our second proposition — “That the 
Catholic Church is a cunningly devised admixture of Pagan¬ 
ism, Christianity and political Despotism.” 

With what we have said we can now understanding^ 
proceed to the discussion of our last two propositions. We 
must invest the entire walls, and undermine the citadel, 
before we commence the general bombardment. I am 

AN AMERICAN. 


NO. XI. 


The Roman Catholic Church or Hierarchy a cunningly devised admixture 
of Civil and Religious Despotism , of Paganism and Christianity—First 
triumph of Christianity over Paganism in the Roman Empire — Consoli¬ 
dation of the Spiritual and Temporal Power under Constantine the 
Great—Struggle between the Eastern and Western Churches , for Su¬ 
premacy—Triumph of the latter — Origin and Practice of the despotic 
powers of the Popes in Political as well as in Eccles tactical A fairs — Re¬ 
cent instances of Papal Interference in the Civil Affairs of Independent 
Nations—The St. Louis Church Property Case in New York—Mental 
Reservations—Does the Catholic Hierarchy serve Mammon or Christ? 

Gentlemen : We will now proceed with the discussion of 
our second proposition, that “The Roman Catholic Church 
or Hierarchy is a cunningly devised admixture oi civil and 
religious despotism; of paganism and Christianity.” First, 
it is a religious and political despotism. 

O, Rome ? from the sword which the warrior brood of thy 
wolf-nursed founders drew, sprung an empire — the most 
4 



50 


majestic monument in the desert of antiquity; gigantic in 
all of its proportions; sublime in its associations; splendid 
in its galaxy of heroes and statesmen, in its poets and sages; 
it was Eternal called, and veiled the earth with its imperial 
shadow. But when its stars were one by one expiring, 
when it was sinking in glory and fading in worth — then 
from the martyred blood of St. Paul and St. Peter , whom 
cruel Nero had in the Circus slain, arose the astounding 
structure of a temporal and spiritual throne of the world. 
The Pope appears not only as the highest Keystone of this 
hierarchical structure, but as a crown of iwiys, whose bril- 
lancy was the inexhaustible source of all ecclesiastical 
splendor; who as God’s Vicegerent is above all potentates 
of earth ; who may dispose of crowns and kingdoms ; the 
supreme legislator and judge ; the dispenser of divine grace 
as well as divine wrath; in all things omnipotent, in all things 
infallible, for unto him is given the power “to loose and to 
bind on earth and in heaven : hence his word can absolve from 
all natural, civil, and divine commands. To rise against the 
Pope therefore, is rebellion against God. Thus history informs 
us that a mere perishiable puppet of this world’s vanity, 
with grace upon his brow, and gold in his hand, has made 
the Almighty “ a menial to his power, and Eternity a pander 
to his ambition and avarice.” 

Let us pass by the incipient struggles of Christianity with 
infidelity and paganism, as well as its lamentable persecu¬ 
tions under Nero, Domitian, the noble Trajan, Hadrian, and 
the Antonines, Severus, Decius, Valerius, Diocletian, Gale- 
rius, and Maximinius-Daza, to the edict of Milan, issued by 
Licennius and Constantine, investing Christianity with all 
the immunities of pagan religions, and proclaiming an 
universal unrestricted freedom of consicence. But the 
great battle for world-empire between Christianity and pa¬ 
ganism was yet to be fought. It took place in the year of 
our Lord 324, in the straits of Gallipolis, and near Adrian- 
ople, in Thrace, between the armaments and legions of 
Licennius and Constantine. Then did the Cross and the 
bannered Eagle united, under Constantine, for the first time 
and forever, triumph over the ancient standards of idolatry ; 
then to the Cross yielded forever, the guardian Genii of the 
haughty mistress of the world, and those gods, whose ven¬ 
erated names had so often inspired Romans to victory, and 
had been invoked amid the thunder-shock of a thousand bat¬ 
tle fields. 

Constantine the Great, having become, by the death of 
his rival, sole Emperor, commenced the organization of the 
empire in accordance with his lofty position — the only head 
and fountain of ecclesiastical and civil authority. The card- 


51 


inal object being to harmonize and consolidate his temporal 
and spiritual power, he therefore divided the empire into 
four prefectures — Gaul, Illyricum, Italy, and the East; and 
these again were divided into a number of dioceses, and 
these into provinces. Constantinople, Cesarea, Alexandria, 
Antioch, and Ephesus constituted the Capitals of the dioceses 
of the first prefecture ; Thessalonica was the Capital of the 
diocese of the Second ; the third contained three dioceses, 
Gaul, Spain, and Britain; and the fourth contained as the 
Capitals of their dioceses, Carthage, Sirmium, and Rome. 
The Bishops of the dioceses were estimated in dignity and 
authority, according to the civil magistrates of their respec¬ 
tive Capitals. Gradually over the Bishops were elevated the 
Metropolitans, Primates, Archbishops, Exarchs, and Patri¬ 
archs. The dignity of the latter was exclusively confined 
to the Bishops of Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, 
and Alexandria, and was the zenith of ecclesiastical prefer¬ 
ment and ambition. By appropriating the revenue of cities 
to the endowment of churches, and for the support of the 
clergy — by lavishing upon the higher order of ecclesiastics, 
immunities, honors, and wealth — by establishing their juris¬ 
diction in matters of church and conscience, as well as their 
right to hold councils, and legislate for their classes, and de¬ 
termine questions of faith, Constantine the Great, added to 
the terrors of the Imperatorial power, the imposing pageantry 
of Oriental Courts, and cemented and fortified the structure 
of unlimited dominion, by the introduction of an artfully de¬ 
vised hierarchy. The first council that was ever held, in 
which these rights of the church and clergy were guarantied, 
and idolatry as a national religion prohibited by an edict, 
took place in A. D. 325, at Nice, by the sanction and under 
the supervision of Constantine. Thus we see that Christi¬ 
anity under Constantine, like paganism under the Kings and 
Emperors of the Roman Republic and Empire, as well as 
amid all the nations of antiquity , was united with the civil 
authorities.in a multifarious and reciprocal relation, through 
the instrumentality of priestly orders or the clergy, to degrade 
and enslave the people. It was a change in the form of relig¬ 
ion, but none in the servitude of the people. Thus was laid 
the ground-plan of that stupendous ecclesiastical organiza¬ 
tion or hierarchy, by which at times Popes were omnipotent 
in Europe, and through which Roman Catholicism is estab¬ 
lished in almost every land under the sun. 

The word Pope is derived from the Greek papas , father, 
and was indiscriminately applied to all Bishops; and this 
name is still given to all the priests ol the Greek Church in 
Russia. It was never exclusively applied to the Bishop of 
Rome, till it was so ordered by a council held in Rome, at 


52 


the close of the elventh century, under Gregory the Eighth. 
The Pope of Rome is now addressed by way of pre-eminence, 
as the “ Most Holy Father.” It is indispensable that we 
should give a concise history of the gradual elevation of the 
Bishops and diocese of Rome over those of the other divisions 
of the Empire, before we prove the despotic temporal and 
spiritual power which the Popes of Rome for ages exercised 
over the Princes and nations of Europe, and which they 
have not yet abandoned over the world. 

When the deliberations of the Council of Nice were term¬ 
inated, Constantine visited the Western portions of his em¬ 
pire. At Rome he met with the bitterest execrations from 
the Italians, because in his edict against paganism he had 
abandoned the ancient religion of his fore-fathers. From 
this fact, as well as the menacing attitude of the powerful 
dynasty of the Persian Sassanides, who boldly aspired to 
the ancient empire of Cyrus ; from the threatened irruptions 
ot the Goths and Samaritans, beyond the Danube; from a 
desire also to resuscitate the lucrative commerce of the 
Mediterranean and Euxine seas, Constantine determined to 
transfer the Metropolis of the empire from Rome to a more 
central point: Byzantium or Constantinople, on the confines 
of Europe and Asia. From this moment commenced a 
spirit of rivalry, ambition, and struggle for supremac}' ^ e ‘ 
tween the Western and Eastern divisions of the empire, 
between the Bishop and diocese of Rome, and those of By¬ 
zantium and the East. The following are the most promi¬ 
nent causes which, in the lapse of four centuries thereafter, 
gave to the former undisputed pre-eminence in all ecclesias¬ 
tical councils and affairs: Rome, though declining, still had 
a population of 4,000,000, and was the most wealthy, vener¬ 
able, and numerous of the Western congregations ; some of 
her Bishops had been distinguished for piety^ and benefi¬ 
cence ; for great ability displayed in civil and religious 
affairs ; for the influence they exercised by intercourse and 
correspondence, over the barbarous nations of the West, 
over the office! s of State, and the congregations of the em¬ 
pire ; because they had early entertained the idea of spirit¬ 
ual supremacy, and had prosecuted their plans with energy 
and wisdom, with uniformity of maxims and expedients, so 
that the goods, honors, and power of each Bishop might in¬ 
crease the fiduciary inheritance of St. Peter, and give to 
each successor enhanced means for further aggressions and 
acquisi'ions ; because they had established various churches 
in Britain, Germany, and other portions of the West, through 
their Priestly Missionaries, subject to their exclusive control; 
because they had been arbitrators in many important dispu¬ 
tations in councils and synods, as in that held at Sardiea in 


53 


A. 0. 344, as well as by the decree of Valentinian III, in 
445 ; because in all schisms between the Eastern and West¬ 
ern Churches, the West always united under the Bishops of 
Rome ; again, from the vast superiority of some of these 
Bishops or Popes over all their contemporaries, as Leo the 
Great in the fifth, Gregory the Great in the sixth, and Leo 
III, who crowned Charlemagne, in the eighth centuries ; and 
finally by the Jalse decretals of the pretended Isidore, forged 
between 830 and 850 by Benedict, a Deacon of Mentz, 
which in those days of ignorance and superstition, among 
the Catholics especially, greatly strengthened the claims of 
the Roman See to supremacy ; and because Rome had been - 
for ages the great heart of the world-ruling empire, from 
which all pulsations of power had emanated. All these 
causes combined, gave to the Popes of Rome a civil and 
spiritual predominance which those of the East could not 
attain, and against which the power of Crowns and Princes 
could not avail. 

We wish before we further proceed to propound a few 
interrogatories. During the limetime of St. Peter, was he 
ever regarded by the Apostles or the Christian world, as pos¬ 
sessed of any exclusive spiritual or temporal power; or as 
the chief corner stone of the Apostolic Church; or did he 
claim to be God’s Vicegerent , with exclusive power to “bind 
and to loose on earth and in Heaven or were these ever 
claimed for centuries after his death by any one for him ? 
Again, for the first six centuries after the death of St. Peter, 
were the Bishops or Popes of Rome regarded as the Su¬ 
preme Heads of the Christian churches and the world ; or 
from their succession to the Bishopric of Rome, was there 
conceded them by the Christian world any exclusive spirit¬ 
ual or temporal power? We answer all in the negative; 
and he who affirms it, forfeits all claims to historical vera¬ 
city or attainments. We will hereafter prove by what foul 
intrigues, murders, rapine, civil and spiritual usurpations, 
the Popes of Rome in the eleventh and twelfth centuries 
became lords paramount in all ecclesiastical and political 
authority. But now we will attempt to establish beyond 
controversy the despotic power both temporal and spiritual, 
claimed and exercised by them over the princes and nations 
of the world, and which, even to this good day, they have 
never abandoned. 

The coronation of Pepin by Zachary, and his two sons by 
Stephen III, were the first recognitions of the divine right 
of Popes to pronounce upon the claims of royalty. In the 
usurpations of this Carlovingian dynasty, both the Kings 
and Popes profited by the outrageous fraud. The Bishops 
to whom Charles the Bald acknowledged the right to depose 


I 


54 


Kings, passed a canon in their council, binding themselves 
to remain united — “For the correction of Kings, the nobil¬ 
ity and the people.” Pope Nicholas I., who constituted him¬ 
self “ sole Judge of Bishops and Kings’* in 880 , deposed the 
Archbishop of Ravena— annulled the second marriage of 
Lothair, King of Loraine, forced him to take back his first 
wife, and to appear before his dread tribunal for confession 
and repentance. Pope John VIII, obliged Charles the Bald 
to confess “ that he held his Empire by the gift of the Pope,” 
and when the Saracens invaded Italy, in reprimanding 
Charles for the delay of his promised support, he bade the 
Emperor to remember “ that lie who had given him the em¬ 
pire, if driven to despair, might change his opinion.” Otho 
the Great received the iron crown of Lombardy and the 
revived title of Emperor of the West from Pope John XII. 
Pope Benedict VIII., before he crowned Henry Emperor of 
Germany, made him solemnly promise “ that he would ob¬ 
serve his fidelity to him and his successors in everything .” 
Pope Nicholas II., gave to Richard Guiscard the principali¬ 
ties of Capua, and to his brother Robert, the title of Duke, 
with the investiture of all the lands he might conquer in 
Sicily, Apulia, and Calabria. The cruelty and desolation 
which ensued is said to have produced even to this day, the 
depopulation and desolation around Rome. Pope Alexan¬ 
der II., forced the Normans in Italy to resign their conquests 
to the Holy See ; he summoned the Emperor of Germany to 
appear before him to answer various allegations; and re¬ 
cognized the claims of William, the Norman Duke, to the 
crown of England by a papal bull, in which “was sent a 
hair from the head of St. Peter, inclosed in a diamond ring 
of great value, and he accompanied this with a consecrated 
standard.” In the eleventh century Pope Gregory VII., in a 
council assembled at Rome, excommunicated the Emperor 
of Germany, absolved the allegiance of his subjects to him 
in France, Italy, and Germany, deposed Prelates at will in 
the Empire, and published a series of constitutions of which 
the following are a portion: “ That the Roman Pontiff alone 
can be called universal — that Princes are bound to hiss his 
feet and his only — that he has aright to depose Emperors — 
that no book can be called canonical without his authority — 
that his sentence can be annulled by none, but that he may 
annul the decrees of all — that the Roman Church has been, 
is, and will continue infallible — that subjects may be ab¬ 
solved from their allegiance to wicked Princes.” This is the 
haughty Pontiff who forced the Emperor Henry IV., of Ger¬ 
many, during one of the severest winters, in the outer court 
of his palace, to remain for three days and nights in the 
garb and posture of penitence, with his feet and head bare 


55 


tortured by cold, hunger, and thirst, to implore him for 
mercy. ’Twas also said of him that he personally presided 
over the most cruel tortures and massacres, with an inimita¬ 
ble serenity of countenance and placidity of manner. Pas¬ 
chal II.. the successor of Pope Urban, excommunicated 
Henry V., Emperor of Germany, and at a council held in 
Rome in 1110, forced all grades of the clergy to take oath 
“ of implicit obedience to the Pope and his successors ; to 
affirm what the Holy Church affirms and condemn what she 
condemns.” Pope Celestine III., kicked the Emperor Henry 
the IV.’s crown from his head while kneeling, “to show his 
prerogative of making and unmaking Kings.” Pope Celes¬ 
tine IV., when elected Pope, entered Aquila seated upon an 
Ass (in blasphemous imitation of our Saviour’s entrance 
into Jerusalem) with two Kings holding the bridle: Charles 

11., the perjured Sovereign of Naples, and his son Charles 
Martel, nominal King of Hungary. Pope Gregory IX., 
excommunicated the Emperor Frederic II., of Germany, 
because he in the fifth crusade, delayed the expedition, and 
when he had entirely failed, this Pope addressed the clergy 
of Sicily as follows; “Let the Heavens rejoice and the Earth 
be glad; for the lightning and the tempest wherewith God 
Almighty has so long menaced your heads have been 
changed by the death of this man into refreshing zephyrs 
and fertilizing dews.” Pope Alexander III., forced the Em¬ 
peror Frederic I., to hold his stirrup while mounting his 
steed; and brought to unconditional obedience in all reli¬ 
gious affairs, the Kings of England and Scotland. Innocent 

111., deposed John, King of England, and threatened the 
whole world with excommunication. Henry III., King of 
France, was assassinated in 1589, by the Dominican, Clement 
Jacques, and although torn to pieces by horses and after¬ 
wards burnt by the enraged subjects of the King, Pope 
Sextus V., pronounced an eulogy upon the assassin in an 
assembly of Cardinals, and impiously “compared him to 
Judith and Eleazer.” 

We will now instance a few cases of recent occurrence, of 
Papal interference in ihe civil affairs of independent nations. 
Pope Pius VI., in June 10th and 111h of 1810, issued two 
formidable bulls against Bonaparte, and one against Switz¬ 
erland, for permitting a free distribution of the “ heretic’s 
bible” among its free citizens. Pope Pius IX., the present 
successor of St. Peter, issued the other day a Bull or-Allo¬ 
cution against the independent King of Sardinia for sup¬ 
pressing Monasteries within his own dominions. These 
hot-beds of sloth, indolence, superstition and crime, have 
been suppressed in various European States, and Heaven 
grant that gallant Tennessee may never be afflicted with 


56 


one of these Pandora’s Boxes. Read this portion of the 
Pope’s “ allocution” which we submit for your careful peru¬ 
sal, for it is a literal translation of the original, as published 
by the American and European press: 

“ Words fail us to express our grief at such criminal 
and almost incredible acts againts the Church and against 
the inviolable supremacy of the Holy See in that kingdom, 
where there are so great a number of fervent Catholics, and 
where formerly, and in particular among the Sovereigns, 
such examples were to be found of piety, religion, and re¬ 
spect for the chair of St. Peter. But the evil having arrived 
at that point that it is not sufficient to merely deplore the 
injury done to the Church, and that we are bound to do 
everything in our power to put an end to this state of things, 
we again raise our voice with an apostolic liberty in this 
solemn assembly, and we reprove and condemn not only all 
the decrees already issued by the Government to the detri¬ 
ment of the rights and authority of the Church, and of the 
Holy See, but likewise the bill lately proposed, and we de¬ 
clare all these acts to be entirely worthless and invalid. 
Furthermore, we warn, in the most solemn manner, not only 
those persons by whose orders such decrees have been pub¬ 
lished, but also those others who may not fear to sanction, 
favor, or approve in any manner whatever the bill recently 
proposed ; we warn them, we say, to consider in time what 
penalties and censures the apostolical constitutions and the 
canons of the Holy Councils, and in particular the canons 
of the Council of Trent, have established against the plun¬ 
derers and profaners of holy things; against the violaters 
of the liberty of the Church and of the Holy See, and 
against the usurpers of their rights.” 

Here you see the Pope asserts that the act of the Sardin¬ 
ian government, “ is against the inviolable supremacy of 
the Holy See,” merely because there are a great many “ fer¬ 
vent Catholic ” citizens of the government. Again he de¬ 
clares the acts of this independent Government “worthless 
and invalid,” merely because he thinks them “to the detri¬ 
ment of the rights and authority of the Catholic Church and 
Holy See.” 

Again, he threatens the King if he do not repeal them, 
“ with all the penalties and censures with which he is clothed 
by the Apostolic constitutions, and the canons of the Holy 
Councils.” 

Americans, just think of it, the Pope of Rome claiming 
inviolable supremacy for the “Holy Church,” because the 
Kingdom of Sardinia, or any other independent State, might 
chance to have many “fervent Catholics” as citizens. Well, 
let us continue for a few years longer to permit unchecked 


57 


our present ocean-tide of Catholic immigration, and the 
Pope of Rome will claim America as a part of his Holy See, 
and will declare our acts of Congress as “worthless and in¬ 
valid,” should they be the least repugnant to his sensitive 
taste, or his “ Holy See.” But we need not wait longer, for 
he has directly interfered, by the sanction of the Archbish¬ 
op and the Bishops of New-York, in our civil and judicial 
affairs. We will impartially state the case. In 1829 Louis 
Le Couteulex, of Buffalo, New-York, conveyed certain real 
estate for the use of a Catholic congregation to be there¬ 
after organized. In 1838 the congregation was organized 
under the law of the State, and seven trustees were elected, 
in whom was vested the title in pursuance of the act “ in 
relation to religious corporations.” Now, because these 
trustees would not violate the laws of the State of New 
York, by divesting themselves of the title of the real estate 
and Church of St. Louis, which was built upon it, and vest 
the same exclusively in the Bishop and his successors — 
thereby creating a “ corporation sole ”— the Pope, through 
the instigation of the Bishop and some of the foreign laity, 
sent his Nuncio, Bedini, over to New-York to force these 
rebellious Catholic Trustees to vest this title in the Bishop, 
or to excommunicate them. The few that refused were 
publicly excommunicated for not violating the laws of the 
land and the express language of the deed of conveyance. 
Now, the Archbishop nor the Bishop of New-York, would 
not abide by the decisions of our own courts, that could 
alone adjudicate and decide this question, but must resort to 
a foreign potentate and his religious authority, to force the 
refractory trustees to obedience — to interfere and annul the 
deliberate acts of a sovereign State of this Union. And 
what is most strange, the Catholic press, the Bishops and 
Priests, and all the Catholic congregations of the Union 
have acquiesced in this excommunication. Read, Tennes¬ 
seeans, the bitter lamentation of these poor fellow's because 
of their excommunication. Really we are sorry for them : 

“ For no higher offence than simply refusing to violate 
the Trust Law of our State, we have been subjected to the 
pains of excommunication, and our names held up to infamy 
and reproach. For this cause, too, have the entire congre¬ 
gation been placed under ban. To our members the holy 
rites of baptism and of burial have been denied. The mar¬ 
riage sacrament is refused. The Priest is forbidden to min¬ 
ister at our altars. In sickness, and at the hour of death, 
the holy consolations of religion are withheld. To the 
Catholic churchman, it is scarcely possible to exaggerate 
the magnitude of such deprivations. 

“ We yield to none in attachment to our religion, and 


C 


58 


cheerfully render to the Bishop that obedience in spiritual 
matters which the just interpretation of our faith may re¬ 
quire : but in respect to the temporalities of our Church, we 
claim the right of obeying the laws of the State, whose 
protection we enjoy.” 

Do you think that the Pope has ceased to interfere in the 
temporal affairs of independent nations? No, nor never 
will he, when his Catholic subjects are sufficiently numer¬ 
ous as citizens in any State to permit him. We will give 
you now the eternal maxim of the Roman Court, pursued 
through all ages, and amid all the vicissitudes of empire, 
and among all nations. Read it, and never forget. ’Tis 
this : “ Never to give up the slightest of its claims , but to wait 
only for the opportunities .” We will close this article by 
stating one fact additional — that when the archives of the 
Popes were carried to Paris in 1809, among other astonish¬ 
ing things, a practice of theirs came to light, which they 
had, of declaring null and void by secret mental reservation 
the contracts which they made in public. Thus Alexander 
VII., in February 18th, 1684, made such a reservation with 
regard to the treaty of Pisa; Clement XIII., in September 
3d, 1704, with regard to the banishment of the Jesuits from 
France; Pius the VII with regard to the tolerance of the 
philosophic sects, bible societies and translations of the 
Bible. If Popes have these mental reservations in the sol¬ 
emn oaths and treaty stipulations, what think you of “ fer¬ 
vent and faithful Bishops and Priests.” Should the Ameri¬ 
can Party trust such men ? 

Read my proposition or text, and you will see that we 
have proved a portion of it, “the political and religious des¬ 
potism of the Catholic flierarchy.” 

Roman Catholics of the United States, we wish you to 
read the 25th, 26th, and 27th verses of the 20th chapter of 
St. Mathew, and tell us whether the Pope, the Bishops and 
Priests of your Church are the disciples of Mammon or the 
followers of the meek and lowly Saviour ? They are as 
follows: “But Jesus called them (the Apostles) unto him 
and said : Ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exer¬ 
cise dominion over them; and they that are great exercise 
authority upon them; but it shall not be so among you ; 
but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your 
Minister; and whosoever will be Chief among you, let him 
be your servant.” 

Jesus did not say Master , gentlemen. The same subject 
continued. I am AN AMERICAN. 




59 

NO. XII. 

Despotic Constitution and Policy of the Roman Catholic Church further 
Examined — The Absurdity of her Sacriligious Pretensions to “ I) falli¬ 
bility ” and “ Divine Holiness ” exposed by the light of History — Vices , 
Crimes , Feuds, and Follies of the Popes — Mysterious System of Ordi¬ 
nation awl Oath of Allegiance, of the Romish Clergy — Numerical 
Strength and Progress of the Romish Church , in the United States and 
other countries — Dogmas of the Roman Catholic Faith , derived from 
Text boohs of the Church — Excerpts from Roman Catholic Writers in 
further illustration of her Despotic Policy in Political as well as Reli¬ 
gious Affairs — Funds appropriated in Europe to aid the Romish Church 
in the United States. 

Gentlemen: We will resume the discussion of our second 
proposition, — The Roman Catholic Church or Hierarchy is 
a cunningly devised admixture of Religious and Political 
Despotism, of Paganism and Christianity. 

Religion , thou immaculate emanation of Divine mercy 
and love ! as a dove reposing upon her nest, thy guardian 
spirit with genial warmth penetrates the immortal germ 
hidden in the depths of a good man’s heart, and it comes 
forth pure and beautiful as some new creation. Illumined 
by the light eternally shining in the bosom of an infinite 
God, man discovers by revelation the true, immutable, the 
ever subsisting ideas and models of all that is, and all that 
can ever be. From this sublime height alone, he contem¬ 
plates his own destiny, which no duration limits—where 
hope spreads in immensity her indefatigable wings — where 
he feels within himself a secret force, bearing him upward 
and onward, as a light body rising from the depths of the sea. 
Christian revelation proclaims popular liberty, universal 
equality, more beautifully, more impressively than Confu¬ 
cius, Solon, Lycurgus, and all other human legislators. It 
teaches the true relation which one man sustains towards 
another : and of all men to God. The lormer is that of 
brothers — the latter is that of children of a common Father. 
The former relation teaches fraternal affection—the latter 
supreme love. Therefore they who claim supreme spiritual 
or temporal power, or any prerogative derived from revelation , 
impiously pervert its holy teachings — ’tis indeed an en¬ 
croachment upon society, a revolutionary usurpation, a germ 
of ty ranny. 

Americans , we conjure you in the name of Heaven, be¬ 
ware of the insidious wiles of those crafty, avaricious, and 
ambitious men, who preach servitude in any form to you, in 
Coe name of God; who plunge the people into ignorance, 
superstition, and stupidity, and then say, “behold the people 
want understanding and reason — they know not how to 


60 


think, to conduct themselves, or worship God ; therefore, 
their own interest requires that they should be directed — 
should be governed — we will be their masters— they ought 
to be our slaves !” Shut your ears, we beseech you, against 
this delusive Syren’s voice — close your hearts against the 
deadly poison it seeks to convey. But, this is Roman Catholi¬ 
cism. For does it not proclaim that Christ appointed Peter 
alone, “his successor and Vicarthat upon “ this rock he 
built his churchthat to him only he gave the power to 
“ bind and loose on earth and in heaven that as the Vicar 
of him who fills the heavens with his majesty, he may in¬ 
deed behold the Kings and Potentates of the earth, no less 
than the servants of the church, submissive at his feet ; that 
by the “ symbol of the two swords” he conferred upon Peter 
all spiritual and secular power; that the spiritual alone 
exists by itself, and shines like the sun, with its own bril¬ 
liancy : while the temporal power borrows from the spiritual, 
a feebler and more dependent light, like the moon from the 
sun—-that the Churches of Christendom, and the thrones of 
the earth derive their glory and glitter from the resplen¬ 
dence of St. Peter’s chair. 

The chief objection to Roman Catholicism is that it never 
improves. Whilst other orbs are brightening more and more 
unto the perfect day, it remains ever the same cheerless, 
changeless, and opaque spot on the face of an illuminated sky. 
What is it connected with the Roman Catholic religion 
which forms the golden chain that has bound its members 
in every age and nation to its communion ? what the talis- 
manic influence that ever retains them within its magic 
circle? what the oblivious antidote that allays all their 
doubts and misgivings about the propriety of any act of 
faith, or ecclesiastical administration ? what the magnet 
that attracts the wavering and desultory of other persua¬ 
sions within its gloomy sphere ? what was it to vindicate and 
establish, the Crusades were commenced and prosecuted : 
nations and individuals were persecuted with fire and sword; 
Kings and people, Empires and Continents were arrayed 
against each other for twelve hundred years, and the blood 
of 40,000,000 of victims flowed like water? Why, it is the 
claims of “ infallibility” and “ divine holiness ” of the Ro¬ 
mish See, of “Holy Mother Church.” These form that 
nimbus , which veils and justifies the pride, ambition, avarice, 
debaucheries, crimes, and murders, of Popes, Cardinals, 
Bishops, Priests, Jesuits, Monks, Convents, and Monasteries, 
of this most holy Mother. She is infallible , and therefore 
cannot err in wisdom. She is divinely holy , and therefore 
all her deeds and actions are righteous. But Jesus said 
“Every tree shall be known by its fruit — a good tree can¬ 
not bring forth evil fruit.” 


61 


History, thou friend of my boyhood, prop and beacon light of my maturer 
years, by thy truthful records expose these blasphemous pretensions, by 
which every tint and hue of crime has been sanctified, and every means 
justified to enslave and degrade mankind. This investigation of the acts 
and deeds of Popes and Cardinals, of Bishops and Priests, of assemblies, 
conclaves and councils, will range through a period of nine hundred years. 
When we have concluded tell us what you think of the “ infallibility ” and 
“divine holiness” of Holy “Mother Church,” and her “most holy 
Fathers ”—the Popes of Rome, as well as the means she has employed to 
beguile the world into a passive obedience to her divine behests. 

The first recognition of Papal supremacy occurred as follows: From the 
implacable hostility which existed between the Bishops of Rome and those 
of Constantinople and the East; between the Greeks and Italians; be¬ 
tween the Western and Eastern portions of the Empire; the Popes of 
Rome early resolved to expel the Greeks from the Romish diocese ; to be¬ 
come independent of the Bishops and Emperors of the East, and to become 
the spiritual and temporal potentates of all the Italian Slates. To ac¬ 
complish this, they entered into a solemn compact with Pepin, and the 
other Carlovingian Kings, to publish bulls deposing the lawful King Chil- 
peric, of the Franks, and absolving the allegiance of the Catholics of the 
Western Empire to him—that they would bestow the crown upon Pepin 
his usurper, and his legitimate successors forever. For the aid thus given, 
and for their future security upon the throne, these Kings assisted the 
Popes to wrest from the Greek Exarchate the territories of the Lombard 
Kingdom ; to establish their sovereignty over the Italian States, and were 
the very first to acknowledge their divine right to depose and elevate Kings. 
This is the first outrageous fraud perpetrated by infallible and Holy Moth¬ 
er Church for worldly aggrandizement. Pope John VIII stipulated with 
Charles the Bald that he would bestow the usurped crown of Lorain upon 
him, (although his predecessor attempted to bribe Charles to yield it to Lou¬ 
is II,) if he would confess that he received it from him and acknowledge 
his dependence upon the Roman See. Hence in an assembly held in Pa- 
ria, in 878, the infallible and holy Italian Nobles and Prelates recognized 
him as the lawful Emperor in these memorable words—“Since the divine 
favor, through the merits of the holy Apostles, and the Vicar , Pope John, 
has raised you to the empire according to the judgment of the Holy Ghost, 
we elect you our protector and Lord.” This is another specimen of holi¬ 
ness in Mother Church. 

Pope John XII was elected at the age of 18, and so distinguished did he 
become for his lechery and other outrageous crimes, that the Emperor Otho 
the Great had him driven Irom his pontificate, and Leo VIII chosen as his 
successor. Upon the departure of Otho from Rome, John and his freinds 
deposed Leo, and again resumed his official duties. But he did not long 
survive, for he was assassinated by a young Italian nobleman, whom he had 
supplanted in the affections of his mistress. ’Twasat this period that two 
infamous courtezans —Theodore and Marozia—by their influence with the 
nobles and clergy, procured the throne of St. Peter for their paramours 
and their illegitimate children, one of whom, Benedict IX, was elected at 
the age of 12 years. What thinks “ Holy Mother” of these instances 
of her “infallibility” and “holiness?” Again, Pope John XIII was 
strangled to death in prison by the leader of the popular party, Cincius, 


62 


for his despotic sway, and support of the Imperial cause. Pope Boniface 
VII murdered his brother, Pope Benedict VII, whom he supplanted. Pope 
Benedict IX was forced to abdicate for his notorious, infamous conduct 
Popes Damascus II and Clement II, were poisoned by the Catholic emissa¬ 
ries of Benedict. Pope Gregory VII, the Napoleon of Pontiffs, besides hia 
barbarity, bribery, and general corruption, lived in sinful dalliance with the 
Countess Matilda, a fervid member of Holy Mother Church Urban II 
was several times driven from the chair of St. Peter by his rival, Pope 
Clement III. Alexander III, during his reign, between 1160 and 1181, 
survived two rival Popes, and vanquished a third. When Pope Gregory 
XI died, the French Cardinals elected Urban VI his successor. But he 
having personally offended the Queen of Naples, they assembled at 
Fondi in the Kingdom of Naples, and annulling their former election, 
chose Clement VII. As both of these Popes claimed the pontificate, they 
thundered against each other, and their Cardinal adherents, counter an¬ 
athemas, and divided all Christendom for thirty-nine years by their disputes 
and contentions. Benedict XIII, Gregory XII, and Alexander V, were 
three rival Popes who lived at the same time in Rome, plundering the 
people, and the treasury of the Romish See; all duly elected legitimate 
successors of St. Peter, by “Most Holy Mother Church” of “infallible 
wisdom” and of “Divine Holiness.” How richly the picture unfolds. 

Again : after the death of Nicholas, the papacy, exhausted by all sorts 
of crimes and excesses, left the Holy See vacant for two long years. Of 
course, during the whole of this time, there was a suspension on earth 
and in heaven of all infallibility, all mercy, all holiness, because there ex¬ 
isted no Pope through which alone these God-like attributes flowed ; no 
successor < f St. Peter, who held alone “the keys, and the power to loose 
and to bind.” But now the solemn farce culminates ; for the populace and 
clergy were threatened by an insane old Monkish Hermit with divine 
vengeance, if they did not at once proceed to an election of a Pope. The 
Conclave met, and elected a feeble old fanatic, and dubbed him with the 
name of Celestine IV. This is the Pope who, in blasphemous imi¬ 
tation of our Saviour’s entrance into Jerusalem, entered Aquilla, seated on 
the back of an Ass, with two Kings holding the bridle of his gallant steed. 
The Cardinals becoming disgusted with the pride and folly of this idiotic 
Pope, deposed him, and elected Boniface VIII, one of their number, his 
successor. Pope Benedict XI revoked the Bulls of his brother, Pope 
Boniface VIII, against the King of France, and died by poison in 1304. 
Again, the Holy See continued vacant for one entire year , on account of 
the bitter contentions and criminations of the Cardinals, which, however, 
terminated in the election of Clement V, who had been previously bought 
up by the King of the French. As proof of this, he restored the Colonas 
in Italy to their ecclesiastical dignities; abrogated the hostile bulls of his 
predecessor against King Phillipe, and gave him a bounty of five years 
tenths from the clergy of his kingdom. Pope Clement is distinguished in 
history for his avarice and extortion. Benedict Xlf issued a bull, by 
which he condemned as heretical the doctrine of his brother, Pope John 
XXII, “that the beatific vision of God was not fully realized till the resur¬ 
rection.” Alexander VI, whom Mosheim calls the “ Nero of Pontiffs,’* 
expired along with his abandoned son, Cardinal Caesar Borgia, after an en¬ 
tertainment, in which they inadvertently drank the poison they had pre- 


63 


pared [ox four rich cardinals. Julius III died March 23d, 1555, leaving a 
character the most detestable for his crimes and debaucheries. He adopt¬ 
ed his nephew, and created Cardinal the hoy who had been his page, and 
keeper of his monkeys. Such was the infamous character of Pope Paul 
IV, that the people of Rome, in 1559, when he expired, broke his statue 
to pieces, and dragged its head through the streets publicly burnt the prison 
of the inquisition, and released from imprisonment hundreds ol the doomed 
victims of his diabolical passions and vengeance. His dying admonitions 
to the Cardinals were, “the universal establishment oi the inquisition, and 
the extermination of unbelievers and heretics.” 

We might extend indefinitely historical instances of the crimes, de¬ 
baucheries, intrigues, knavery, murders, schisms, and collisions of the 
Popes, Cardinals, conclaves, assemblies, and councils of this “infallible,” 
and most “Holy Mother Church but what we have presented ought to 
suffice to expose her blasphemous pretentions to the attributes of Divinity, 
and the wicked means by which she has sought to degrade and enslave 
mankind. 

The reform of Pope Nicholas II in A. D. 1059, was the finishing stroke 
of that grand consolidated system of spiritual and temporal despotism by 
which the Roman Catholic Church has preserved its organization, rigidly 
and uniformly for ages, amid all nations, through all the changing tides of 
time. What was this reform ? First, that the elections of all Popes should 
be exclusively confined to the Cardinals. For centuries the nobles of 
Italy, the French Monarchs, and the German Emperors, nominated, or 
had elected, their favorites to the papal chair; hence these Popes could 
not pursue their selfish and aggrandizing policy without partial depen¬ 
dence upon these potentates. They must be independent, and consequent¬ 
ly must be elected alone by Cardinals, who themselves were created such 
by Popes, and had no ties but those that bound them to Mother Church. 
Secondly, the prohibition of the investiture of the spiritual order, such as 
Bishops, by secular heads, as kings and princes. This was to prevent any 
dependence of Archbishops, Bishops, or Priests, upon any Prince or State 
for office, or its honors or emoluments; but to bind all these ecclesiasti¬ 
cal dignitaries, like all the Cardinals, alone to the Throne of St. Peter. 
Thirdly, the injunction of Celibacy , which was to be ridgidly enforced 
against every grade of the clergy. For the first centuries, like the Apos¬ 
tle Peter and others, the clergy all married if they desired. But this 
identified them with society; they formed attachments for wives, children, 
relatives, friends, and country, and all this was contrary to the single, iso¬ 
lated and despotic attachment to the Romish See, which was necessary to 
compass her spiritual and temporal domination; her enslavement of all 
men and nations. Thus, as history proves, ever since the perfection of 
this religious organization, the Archbishops, the Bishops, Priests, Jesuits, 
and Monkish orders of the Roman Catholic Church, have never evinped 
any tie or affection for any object on earth save the Romish See; they 
have never had, nor by their oaths of ordination, can they have, any other 
country but “Holy Mother Church.” The Pope of Rome (their Lord and 
Master,) and “Mother Church,” are their only objects of love and idolatry. 
To procure office they must obtain it from the Pope. If they need money 
for any Church purposes, when all other sources fail, they know that their 
most “Holy Father” never denies his faithful and obedient children any- 


64 


thing. Thus, the Roman Catholic Clergy, bound to no earthly object of 
affection, to no country, move through the world animated corpses, their 
souls retired to their own centre, and concentrated there, consume them¬ 
selves in midnight solitude, and like Lamps in gloomy sepulchres, shine 
only upon the ruins of man. 

What is the secret organization of the American party, compared to that 
mysterious system of ordination and oath of allegiance which exists between 
the Romish See and the clergy of every order of the Catholic church? Can 
you now find out that system? Can you get a Jesuit or a Bishop, the one to 
publish his oath of allegiance, the other his oath of ordination? You can¬ 
not, by torture, extort either from them. This chain of despotism extends 
from the chair of St. Peter, through every nation, and is every where forged 
to enslave the people. We will give you some idea of the general diffusion 
of this religion among the nations of the globe. In Asia the subjects of 
thfi Grand Seignor are Catholic, as are the Maronites of Mount Lebanon; 
they are found in vast numbers in Syria, Mesopotamia, Armenia, Persia, 
Hindostan, throughout the vast Empire of China, in Cochin China, Ton- 
quin, Siam, in the Phillippine Islands, and through all others of the Eastern 
Ocean. In Africa, it prevails in Madeira, the Canary and Cape DeVerd 
Islands; the greater portion of the inhabitants of Loango, Congo and An- 
golia, adhere to this religion: and so also, those of the kingdom of Moca- 
ranga, Mozambique, Zanquebar, and Melinda. Many also, are found in 
Guinea and in Egypt, and other Mahomedan States of the North. In 
South America, Mexico and Central America, four-fifths of the inhabitants 
of every State belong to the Catholic church. The Dutch Guina is the 
only exception. Three-fourths of the inhabitants of the Canadas are Cath¬ 
olics. In Europe, the religion of Spain, Portugal, Austria, the Italian 
States, France, Germany and Ireland, is Catholic, and it is either the es¬ 
tablished or prevailing religion; while in England, Scotland, Norway, 
Sweden, Belgium, Prussia, Turkey and Russia, the Catholics are only 
inferior in number to the members of the established church, or predomi¬ 
nant religion. Of all Christian denominations, the Catholic is by far the 
most numerous in the world. In Europe, Asia, Africa, America and Oce- 
anica, in 1845, there were 731 Bishoprics, and a total Catholic population 
of 155,777,540. Since this period, in the United States, in Africa and 
Asia, they have increased most wonderfully. We find in 1834, from the 
“ Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge,” that there were in the United 
States, of Roman Catholics, 1 Arch Bishop, 10 Bishops, 327 officiating 
clergymen, 146 Sisters of Charity, 8 Roman colleges, 29 convents, and a 
population of 550,000. In 1850, from the “Census Reports,” we find, of 
Roman Catholic Churches, 812; of Ministers, 864 ; and of population, 
1,173,700. 

Thus, we see, in the last sixteen years, the Roman Catholics in the U. 
States have doubled in numbers, and are increasing much more rapidly 
than any other denomination. But by far the greater portion of this in¬ 
crease is from foreign immigration, and mostly of Germans and Irish, with 
foreign attachments, language, kindred and ideas of government. 

We wish to prove to you, beyond all doubt, in what estimation all other 
Christian denominations are held by Roman Catholics, and what, indeed, 
would become of them if they were predominant, or had the power in the 
United States. The following propositions were extracted from “Dr. 


65 


Deri’s System of Theology,” a text-book for every Papal theological semi¬ 
nary in the land: 1st. “Protestants are heretics, and as such, are worse 
than Jews and Pagans. 2nd. They are, by baptism and blood, under the 
power of the Roman Catholic church. 3rd. So far from granting tolera¬ 
tion to Protestants, it is the duty of the Church to exterminate the rites of 
their religion. 4th. It is the duty of the Roman Catholic Church to compel 
heretics to submit to her faith. 5th. That the punishments decreed by the 
Roman Catholic Church, are confiscation of goods, exile, imprisonment 
and death.” We will also give you some extracts from the Popish Testa¬ 
ment, commonly known as the “ Rhemish Testament.” Protestants: “To 
be present at their service, and all communication with them, in spiritual 
things, is a great and damnable sin.” “ The church service of England, 
they being in heresy and schism, is not only unprofitable, but damnable.” 
“The translators of the English Bible ought to be abhorred to the depths of 
hell.” “Justice, and rigorous punishment of sinners is not forbidden, nor 
Christian Princes for putting heretics to death. Heretics ought, by public 
authority , either spiritual or temporal , to be chastised or executed.” “The 
blood of millions of saints, shed by the Papal Church, is not called the 
blood of saints any more than the blood of thieves , mankillers , or any other 
malefactors, for the shedding of which, by order of justice, no common¬ 
wealth shall answer.” 

Tennesseeans, as further confirmation of the spirit of the Catholic 
Church, and of its ulterior designs against the liberty and institutions of 
the American people, we submit various extracts culled from leading Cath¬ 
olic Journals in the United States and Europe, from their leading reviews, 
from the speeches of Daniel O’Connel, the Encyclical Letter of Pope Pius 
IX, and the disclosures made by the violent Papist, Duke of Richmond, 
while Governor General of Canada. They are as follows: 

For our part, we take this opportunity of expressing our hearty delight 
at the suppression of the Protestant chapel at Rome. This may be thought 
intolerant, but when, we would ask, did we ever profess to be tolerant of 
Protestantism, or favor the doctrine that Protesta ntism ought to be tolerated? 
On the contrary, we hate Protestantism—we detest it with our whole heart 
and soul, and we pray that our aversion to it may never decrease. We hold 
it meet, that in the Eternal City no worship repugnant to God should be 
tolerated, and we are sincerely glad that the enemies of truth are no longer 
allowed to meet together in the capitol of the Christian world.— Neioburgh 
Catholic Visitor. 

No good government can exist without religion; and there can be no re¬ 
ligion without an inquisition, which is wisely designed for the promotion 
and protection of the true faith.— Boston Pilot. 

* You ask if he [the Pope] were lord in the land, and you were in a mi¬ 
nority, if not in numbers, yet in power, what would he do to you? That, 
we say, would entirely depend on circumstances. If it would benefit the 
cause of Catholicism, he would tolerate you—if expedient, he would im¬ 
prison you, banish you, fine you, possibly he might even hang you ; but, 
be assured of one thing, he would never tolerate you for the sake of the 
“glorious principles” of civil and religious liberty,— Rambler. 

Protestantism of every form, has not, and never can have any rights 
where Catholicity is triumphant.— Brownson's Quarterly Review. 

5 


66 


Let us dare to assert the truth in the face of the lying world, and instead 
of pleading for our Church at the bar of the State, summon the State itself 
to plead at the bar of the Church, its divinely constituted judge .—I bid. 

I never think of publishing anything in regard to the Church, without 
submitting my articles to the Bishop for inspection, approval and endorse¬ 
ment.— Ibid. 

I declare my most unequivocal submission to the Head of the Church, 
and to the hierarchy in its different orders. If the Bishops would make a 
declaration on this bill, I never would be heard speaking against it, but 
would submit at once, unequivocally, to that decision. They have only to 
decide, and they close my mouth; they have only to determine and I obey. 
I wish it to be understood that such is the duty of all Catholics .—Daniel 
(V Connell. 

Heresy and unbelief are crimes; and in Christian countries, as in Italy 
and Spain, for instance, v/here all the people are Catholics, and where the 
Catholic religion is an essential part of the law of the land, they are pun¬ 
ished as other crimes.— R. C., Bishop of St. Louis. 

A heretic examined and convicted by the church, used to be delivered over 
to the secular power, and punished with death. Nothing has ever appeared 
to us more necessary. More than 100,000 persons perished inconsequence 
of the heresy of Wickliffe, and a still greater number for that of John Huss; 
and it would not be possible to calculate the bloodshed caused by Luther, 
and it is not yet over .—Paris Universe. 

As for myself, what I regret, I frankly own, is, that they did not burn 
John Huss sooner, and that they did not likewise burn Luther. This hap¬ 
pened because there was not found some prince sufficiently politic to stir 
up a crusade against Protestants .—Paris Universe. 

The absurd and erroneous doctrines of ravings in defense of liberty of 
conscience, is a most pestilential error—a pest of all others most to be 
dreaded in a State .—Encyclical Letter of Pope Pius XI, Aug. 15,1852. 

Protestantism of every kind. Catholicity inserts in her catalogue of mor¬ 
tal sins. She endures it when and where she must, but she hates it, and 
directs all her energies to effect its destruction.— Shepherd of the Valley. 

Religions Liberty, in the sense of a liberty possessed by every man to 
choose his religion, is one of the most wretched delusions ever foisted on 
this age by the father of all deceit —The Rambler. 

The Church is, of necessity, intolerant. Heresy she endures when and 
where she must; but she hates it, and directs all her energies to its destruc¬ 
tion. If Catholics ever gain an immense numerical majority, religious free¬ 
dom in this country is at an end. So our enemies say—so we believe.— 
Shepherd of the Valley. 

The liberty of heresy and unbelief is not a natural right. All the rights 
the sects have or can have, are derived from the State, and rest on expedi¬ 
ency. As they have in their character of sects hostile to the true religion, 
no rights under the law of nature or the law of God, they are neither 
wronged nor deprived of liberty if the State refuses to grant them any 
rights at all.— Brownson's Review, Oct., 1852, p, 456. 

The sorriest sight to us is a Catholic throwing up his cap and shouting, 
“All hail, democracy!”— Brownson's Review, Oct., 1851, pp. 555-8. 

We think the “masses” were never less happy, less respectable, and less 
respected, than they have been since the Reformation, and particularly 


67 


within the last fifty or one hundred years-—since Lord Broughman caught 
the mania of teaching them to read, and communicated the disease to a large 
proportion of the English nation, of which, in spite of all our talk, we are 
too often the servile imitators.— Shepherd of the Valley . 

You should do all in your power to carry out the intentions of His Holi¬ 
ness, the Pope. Where you have the electoral franchise, give your votes 
to none but those who will assist you in so holy a struggle.— Daniel O'Con- 
nel , 1843. 

The Duke of Richmond, speaking of the government of the United States, 
said : “It was weak, inconsistent and bad; and could not long exist. It will 
be destroyed; it ought not, and will not be permitted to exist; for many and 
great are the evils that have originated from the existence of that govern¬ 
ment. The curse of the French Revolution, and subsequent wars and com¬ 
motions in Europe, are to be attributed to its example; and so long as it ex¬ 
ists, no prince will be safe upon his throne; and the sovereigns of Europe 
are aware of it; and they have determined upon its destruction, and have 
eome to an understanding upon this subject, and have decided on the means 
to accomplish it; and they will eventually succeed by subversion rather than 
conquest .” “All the low and surplus population of the different nations of 
Europe will be carried into that country. It is, and will be a receptacle for 
the bad and disaffected population of Europe, when they are not wanted 
for soldiers, or to supply the navies; and the governments of Europe will 
favor such a course. This will create a surplus and a majority of low popu¬ 
lation, who are so very easily excited; and they will bring with them their 
principles; and in nine cases out of ten, adhere to their ancient and former 
governments, laws, manners, customs and religion; and will transmit them 
to their posterity; and in many cases, propagate them among the natives. 
These men will become citizens, and by the constitution and laws, will be 
invested with the right of suffrage. The different grades of society will 
then be created by the elevation of.a few, and by degrading many, and thus 
a heterogeneous population will be formed, speaking different languages, and 
of different religions and sentiments; and to make them act, think and feel 
alike in political affairs, will be like mixing oil and water; hence, discord, 
dissension, anarchy and civil war will ensue; and some popular individual 
will assume the government, and restore order, and the sovereigns of Eu¬ 
rope, the emigrants, and many of the natives will sustain him.” “The 
church of Rome has a design upon that country; and it will in time, be the 
established religion, and will aid in the destruction of that republic-” “I 
have conversed with many of the sovereigns and princes of Europe, and 
they have unanimously expressed these opinions relative to the Government 
of the United States, and their determination to subvert it.” 

As additional proof of the designs of the “Church of Rome” upon the 
United States, we append the following “contributions received in the 
United States from abroad, to aid the Catholics to build churches, erect 
colleges, to support the clergy,” &c-,&c.: During the year 1839, they 
received $160,000; in 1840, $163,000; in 1842, $177,000; in 1843, 
$175,000; in 1844, $150,000; in 1845, $160,000 ; in 1846, $250,000. 
Since this period, from the most, reliable data, they could not have re¬ 
ceived less, annually, than $200,000. We are credibly informed, that the 
Bishop of Nashville,* but the other day, received from “his most holy fath¬ 
er,” Pius IX, a very handsome sum. 


68 


We now solemnly ask every American citizen, in view of these facts r 
how can he withhold his support from the American Party, if he wish to 
preserve for himself and his children longer, American constitutional lib¬ 
erty. We challenge any man living, to show, in any age or among any 
people, when the Roman Catholic Church was ever the friend of popu¬ 
lar sovereignly —when it was ever the advocate of the freedom ol thought 
and conscience, or of an untrammeled education of the people, where 
it was the dominant or established church. 

Our next article will conclude this series. I am AN AMERICAN. 


NO. XIII. 

The Constitution of the Homan Catholic Church further considered as 
antagonist to Civil Liberty and Popular Rights—Colonization of 
Maryland hy Lord Baltimore—Catholic toleration in Poland—The 
Roman Catholic admixture of Paganism and Christianity—The Pope's 
pretensions to supreme authority in Civil and Religious affairs, whence 
derived—The Pagan and Catholic Priesthoods analogous — Organiza¬ 
tion , policy and discipline of the different orders of the Priesthood, and. 
their implicit obedience to the Pope—Monachism a Pagan element of the 
Roman Catholic Church—The Confessional—The doctrine of Purga¬ 
tory—Image worship derived from Paganism , and commended by Pope 
Gregory II— The adoration of Relics—Roman Catholic Miracles—The 
doctrine of Indulgences, and the shocking abuses to which it led — Catho¬ 
lic and Protestant countries compared—Political position of the Ameri¬ 
can Party with regard to all other parties — Dedication. 

Gentlemen: In article tenth we announced the three fol¬ 
lowing propositions for discussion : First: That the Govern¬ 
ment of the United States was the only one that ever existed in 
which all religious power and authority were separate from all 
political. Secondly: That the Roman Catholic Church, or 
Hierarchy was a cunningly devised admixture of politico-reli¬ 
gious despotism, of paganism and Christianity. Thirdly: That 
the union of Church and State in the organism of Govern¬ 
ments, has invariably led to the usurpation of the rights of the 
people—to national corruption, degradation and ruin. 

The first proposition we have thoroughly discussed—the sec¬ 
ond and third partially. We, therefore, propose, in this, our 
last communication, not only to conclude our remarks upon the 
second and third propositions, but also to define explicitly our 
position relative to all other political parties. 

We have previously stated that the Catholic Church, in no 
age or nation, was ever the friend of political and religious 
liberty, of popular sovereignty, of the inalienable rights of the 
people, where it was either the dominant or the established 
religion ; and we have challenged any confutation. But it has 
been asked with no ordinary degree of complacencv:—Was 
not the colony of Maryland, established by Lord Baltimore, 
Catholic, and did it not grant the free enjoyment of religious 



69 


faith and opinion at a period, when, throughout every other 
English colony, Protestants were persecuting each other with 
all the virulence of a bigoted sectarian animosity? Again, was 
not Catholic Poland struggling for political and religious eman¬ 
cipation, when Russia, Prussia and Austria, like Promethean 
vultures, tore her vitals asunder? Did not freedom shriek 
when Kosciusko fell? We will answer these as we have all 
similar questions, with unquestionable historical facts, for we 
are not conscious of having perpetrated at any time, the least 
inaccuracy. 

In 1632, when Lord Baltimore procured from King James 
of England his patent to plant the Colony of Maryland beyond 
the Potomac, he was an Irish nobleman. Born in Yorkshire, 
England, and educated at Oxford, he was the firm friend of 
Sir Robert Cecil, and the recipient of the favor and high con¬ 
sideration of his sovereign. He had been a member of the 
British Parliament, and also one of the Secretaries of State. 
But all this time he was a zealous Protestant. Upon his renun¬ 
ciation of Episcopacy, and profession of Catholicism, he retired 
by the favor of his sovereign, upon the dignity of an Irish 
peerage, and the benevolent and accomplished Sir George Cal¬ 
vert became Lord Baltimore. Having ever shared in the gen- 
eial enthusiasm of England in favor of American plantations, 
he failed in his first enterprize to colonize New Foundland. Be¬ 
coming fascinated with the glowing and picturesque description 
of the hospitable clime, the beautiful scenery and prolific soil 
of the Potomac, he sought and obtained from the Crown an¬ 
other patent to colonize Eastward and Northward of the Vir¬ 
ginia Plantation. Hence, the ocean, the fortieth parallel of 
latitude, the meridian of the western fountain of the Potomac, 
the river itself from its source to its mouth, and a line drawn 
due east from Watkins 5 Point to the Atlantic, formed the metes 
and bounds of this, his second charter. The name given it 
(Maryland) was in honor of Henrietta Maria, the wife ot 
Charles I., daughter of Henry IV. The following is a part of 
the first statute of this colony, passed in April, 1649, relative 
to religious liberty: “Whereas, the enforcing of the conscience 
in matters of religion, has frequently fallen out to be of dan¬ 
gerous consequence in those commonwealths where it has been 
practised ; and for the more peaceful and quiet government of 
this province, and the better to preserve mutual love and amity 
among the inhabitants, no person professing to believe in Jesus 
Christ, shall be in any way troubled, molested, or discounte¬ 
nanced for his or her religion, or in the free exercise thereof.” 
This clause of toleration extended only to Christians, for it was 
introduced by the proviso: “Whatsoever person shall blas¬ 
pheme God, deny or reproach the Holy Trinity, or any of the 
Three Persons thereof, shall be punished with death. Thus, it 


70 


is evident that Jews, Mahometans and Pagans, who are not 
Christians, would have been punished with death! and perlect 
toleration did not exist in this Catholic Colony. 

But this instance of Catholic toleration was supremely lidic- 
ulous from other considerations. Who was Fjord Baltimore ? 
By birth, education, and the greater portion ol his life, a Pro¬ 
testant. From whom did he obtain his charter ? From a 
Protestant King, Parliament and people. If Lord Baltimore 
had attempted to obtain a patent to plant a Catholic Colony, 
in which he purposed to persecute Protestants, from James, or 
Charles, or the British Parliament, it would have been impos¬ 
sible. Would these Protestants, who were at that very mo¬ 
ment, in the home government, persecuting the Catholics, have 
granted a charter to a Catholic, by which he and his colony 
might persecute themselves? ’Tis ridiculous, the supposition. 
If we wish to ascertain what sort of a charter would have 
been procured from a Catholic Prince and people, if sought, 
let ns look at the condition of Catholic Spain. France and 
Spain had both colonized Florida—the French as Protestant 
Calvinists. When the bigoted Romanist, Philip It., of Spain, 
learned this fact, he said that the heretic Calvanists should not 
colonize in the neighborhood of his Catholic provinces; and 
he immediately despatched Pedro Melendez De Avilles, distin¬ 
guished for his intolerance, barbarity and vengeance, to fit out 
an expedition to ‘extirpate the heretics, but spare the Catholics/ 
Hence, on his arrival at the French port, when asked who he 
was, he replied to the commandant: “I am Melendez of Spain, 
sent with strict orders, by mv King, to gibbet and behead ail 
the Protestants in these regions. The Frenchmen who are 
Catholics I will spare, but every heretic shall die.” He butch¬ 
ered hundreds of men, women and children indiscriminately. 
This is a fair specimen of Catholic toleration by a Catholic 
Prince and people. 

Now for Catholic toleration in ill-fated Poland. Its first divis¬ 
ion occurred as follow's : A spirit of territorial aggrandizement 
on the part of Russia, Austria and Prussia, had its influence 
—the defects of the Polish constitution, in that its monarchy 
was elective, which invited foreign interference and intrigue, 
had also somewhat to do with it; but the cardinal cause was 
the civil war brought about by the'persecution of the Protest¬ 
ants, and members of the Greek church by the established 
church—the Roman Catholic. By the Diets of 1717 and 1733, 
these dissidents were deprived of the public exercise of their 
religion. Hence, Russia, Great Britain, Denmark and Prussia 
demanded of the Diet of ] 766 a reinstatement of the Dissidents 
in the same religious and civil rights which they had anteriorly 
enjoved, and reason and humanity demanded. But the zeal of 
the fanatic Catholics refused, and foreign aid was then invoked 


71 


by the disfranchised religionists. The Pope and Austria sup¬ 
ported the Catholics—Russia and Prussia the malcontents. 
Austria soon withdrew her aid. and joined the active coalition 
upon a formally ratified compact, that she should share equally 
in the spoliation of Poland. It was done, and the first division 
resulted, more than any other cause, from Catholic bigotry and 
intolerance. 

The second and third divisions, or the total obliteration of 
Poland from the map of nations, happened as follows: When 
war broke out between Russia and the Ottoman Porte, the 
former demanded of Poland an offensive and defensive alli¬ 
ance. But Poland, smarting under the accursed retrospection 
of her first dismemberment, and the quartering upon her citizens 
of a large Russian army, and being promised aid by the King 
of Sweden and Frederic William of Prussia, boldly resolved 
once more to strike for independence; and demanded of the 
Empress an immediate withdrawal of her troops from all her 
territories. Catharine II, astonished at such courageous and 
defiant resolution, withdrew her troops, and the world paid the 
intrepid Poles the merited tribute of loud applause. Now, the 
permanent Council of State was dissolved, and now a com¬ 
mittee was appointed to draft a new constitution, more in ac¬ 
cordance with the advanced spirit of the age ; for the dreadful 
storm-cloud of the French Revolution, based on natural equal¬ 
ity, had darkened the western horizon of Europe, and its mut¬ 
tering thunders threatened even the distant Imperial throne 
of the Czar. The constitution was framed and adopted, but 
it did not recognize either religious toleration, the sovereignty 
of the people, or equality of civil rights. It fixed the Catho¬ 
lic as the established religion, and granted to all other confes¬ 
sions “a reasonable liberty”—it declared the Polish throne 
hereditary, and appointed Frederic Augustus, of Saxony, suc¬ 
cessor to the reigning king—it gave exclusively to the king 
and his council, the exercise of the executive authority, and 
permitted these also to participate in the legislative department 
—it guarantied unimpaired the prerogatives of the nobility, and 
left the peasants—the people— the fundamental mass of the 
nation, still in hopeless bondage. But bitter dissensions and 
fearful broils still existed among the Poles. Then it was un¬ 
happy Poland was shamefully abandoned by all her allies— 
Prussia and faithless Austria armed against her, and Russian 
hordes, with Scythian barbarity,pouring down in mountain tor¬ 
rents, overwhelmed her. The heroic Madalinski and Kosci¬ 
usko, though fighting like Nemean Lions, bathed iii blood, could 
not save her ; for Providence decreed that they should leave 
her as they found her, decayed in her glory and sunk in her 
worth. Then occurred the second and third divisions; and 
then shot fearfully from the political heavens of Europe, the 


72 


star of the once glorious, and in the Fast, predominant Polish 
state—the lamentable victim of national spoliation, and viola¬ 
ted internal public law. Thus we see that Catholic Poland 
was never the friend of popular sovereignty, ot the inalienable 
rights of the people, or civil or religious liberty. 

We will now discuss the Romish Church, with regard to its 
admixture of paganism and Christianity. The best summary 
of the doctrines of this church is found in the famous creed o( 
Pope Pius IV, which is regarded as the true and unquestionable 
body of Popery. The XXIII article of this creed is what 
every Bishop, Priest, and Archbishop must swear to : — “ I do 
acknowledge the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church 
to be the Mother and Mistress of all churches; and I do pro¬ 
mise and swear true obedience to the Bishop ( Pope) of Rome— 
successor to St. Peter —Prince of Apostles, and the Vicar of 
Jesus Christ” But we will quote the language of Catholic 
writers themselves, of the estimation in which the Pope by 
them is held. Jocabatius, Durand, Gilbert and Pithion, on the 
authority of the Canon law, style the Pontiff “ the Almighty’s 
Vicegerent—who occupies the place, not of a mere man, but 
of the true God.” According to Innocent the Third, “ The 
Pope holds the place of the true God.” The Canon Law in 
the gloss denominates the Roman Hierarch “ Our Lord 
God.” These quotations will suffice for our purpose, but we 
might multiply them indefinitely. This claim of the Pope is 
certainly indispensable, to justify his spiritual and temporal 
supremacy. But it was not suggested by any such pretension 
on the part of St. Peter, or any other of the Apostles or early 
christains. It must, therefore, have been from the claims of 
Pagan religion. Let us see. The Grand Lama, who, like the 
Pope, resides in a magnificent palace at Patoli in Thibet, and 
surrounded by quite as many servile priests, is called, even 
now, the “ Vicegerent of God on earth;” and the distant 
nomadic tribes of Tartary (as the Jesuits, the Popes,) regard 
him absolutely as the Deity himself; and Kings and Emperors 
(as they do the Pope) pay him homage. The believers of this 
religion call the Grand Lama “Infallible and Most Holy Lord;” 
and he (like the Pope of Rome) is absolute in power through¬ 
out his vast dominions. It prevails throughout the whole of 
Asia, and it is said to be one of the most ancient of religions. 
The Maximus Pontifix, the High Priest of the Druids, was 
absolute in his authority; and those who refused civil or reli¬ 
gious obedience to him were declared “impious and accursed.” 
The Imam of the Druses, is regarded by the followers in the 
same extraordinary light. Among the Medes and Persians, 
each King was honored with the high sounding title of “ King 
of Kings”—was regarded as infallible, the only holy fountain 
of civil and religious authority; and being possessed of abso- 


73 


lute power, these Kings claimed equal respect with the gods 
themselves. The Kings of the Parthians were held in the 
same estimation. Mahomet claimed to be the Vicegerent of 
God—the first in dignity and last in succession, of all the holy 
prophets, one of whom he esteemed Jesus Christ, and he, too, 
claimed infallibility and absolute power. The Koran declares 
“ there is but one God, and Mahomet is his prophet.” Thus, 
we see that this claim of the Pope to Vicegerency and infalli¬ 
bility is not of Christian, but Pagan authority; and the object 
being the same with these imposters—the enslavement and 
degradation of mankind. 

We have previously shown that the despotisms of the old 
world were sustained through the agency of pagan priesthood 
or clergy; so the Romish church has employed its priesthood 
to attain universal supremacy in the modern world. In every 
respect—in organization, in doctrines of passive obedience, in 
pretensions of mystic lore and religious prerogative, in the un¬ 
scrupulous means employed, in indomitable thirst after posts of 
distinction and wealth, the Pagan and Catholic priesthoods are 
analogous. All Catholics obey their Bishops—these their Me¬ 
tropolitans—these their Primates—these their Patriarchs, and 
all are bound by an irrefragible chain to the throne of St. Peter. 
Beneath all these, dispersed throughout the nations of the earth, 
is the ever active, vigilant and working priesthood. They are 
chiefly divided into two orders, differing only in the parts which 
each has to play in the grand drama of world empire—the 
one Monastic, the other Jesuitical. The immediate design of 
the Monastic Order, was, to separate its members from the 
world ; that of the Jesuits, to render themselves the masters 
of it. The Monk was a retired devotee of Heaven, and required 
to work out his salvation by extraordinary acts of devotion 
and self-denial. The follower of Loyola considered it his duty 
to plunge into all the bustle of secular affairs, to maintain the 
interests of the Romish church; he was sent forth to watch 
every transaction of the world which might affect the interests 
of religion, and was especially enjoined to study the disposi¬ 
tions, and cultivate the friendships of persons of high rank; 
and bound in perfect obedience to his Captain General, who 
resided in Rome, appointed by the Pope; he went wherever 
he was ordered, performed what he was commanded, and suf¬ 
fered whatever he was enjoined. However liberal the external 
aspect of this institution seemed, nothing can be imagined so 
rigid and secret as its organization. Before the expiration of 
the sixteenth century, the Jesuits had obtained the chief control 
of the education of the youths of every Catholic country in 
Europe, and were the confessors of almost all its Monarchs. 
But in every position, they moulded all and every thing to the 
despotic sway of the Romish See. 


74 


“A Protean tribe, one knows not what to cal], 

Which shifts to every form, and shines in all, 

Grammarian, Painter, Augur, Rhetorician, 

Rope-dancer, conjuror, fiddler, and physician. 

All trades their own, the Pope their God in all.” 

Of the Monastic orders there are many varieties: Basilians, 
Benedictines, Augustinians, Dominicans, Franciscans, Canons 
regular, and others. Like all the variety of Nuns, they take 
the solemn vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, and diller 
only in rules of discipline, dress and peculiar privileges granted 
to each order by the Pope. While the Monks are almost all 
under the jurisdiction of the Pope, the Nuns are either under 
that of the Bishop or clergyman of their own order. The 
ascetic principles which constitute the basis of the Monastic 
orders are more ancient than Christianity itself. They were 
commonly practiced among the Hindoos, Gymnosophists, 
Esseans, Pythagoreans, and Cynics, by anacorites, hermits, 
recluses, monks and priests; and even at present, the coun¬ 
tries in which the religions of Brama, Fo, Lama, and Mo¬ 
hammed prevail, are full of fakirs, santons, tanirs, talapoins, 
bonzes, and dervises, whose fanatical and absurd penances, like 
those of the Catholic monastics, are rather the arts of hypoc¬ 
risy than the fruits of piety. These abominable orders were 
not known to the early Christians, and are opposed to every 
principle of Christianity. It was not until the fifth and sixth 
centuries that these institutions became the reputed asylums 
of retired purity and sanctity. Mahomet was violently op¬ 
posed to all Monks, and they were not introduced into his 
church for three hundred years after his death. He said, “ I 
am opposed to vows which war against nature, because they 
war against God.” 

Monachism is another Pagan element of the Catholic church. 
It requires the suppression of natural affection, all social enjoy¬ 
ment, and its very essence is affected piety. Nature cannot be 
offended with impunity—you cannot suppress her powers, 
without their elastic rebound open for themselves a destructive 
course. The Monk and the Nun, constrained to renounce the 
most agreeable sentiments—to be severe to themselves—ene¬ 
mies to all pleasure, however innocent, dead to the world, be¬ 
come intolerant, destitute of all forbearance, compassion, or 
sympathy. In all the annals of bloody persecutions, these 
Catholic orders have ever been chiefly conspicuous. Subject¬ 
ing themselves to the law of blind obedience, they adopt the 
despicable sentiments of slaves, and lose all idea of the true 
dignity and moral grandeur of human nature. How can these 
miserable specimens of human nature esteem the domestic, 
social and civil virtues, when thev. have renounced them for- 
ever, and are incessantly teaching others to do so. The State 


75 


where Monachism prevails, is closed to all liberal cultivation 
of the mind, to all high moral illumination, to ennobling free¬ 
dom, to human felicity, to industrial development, thrift and 
fortune—to the highest destination of man. Its genial soil is 
despotism, superstition, hypocrisy and sensuality. 

The Chaldean and Egyptian priests were analogous to the 
Jesuits; they were ministers in the temple, philosophers, 
statesmen, architects, skilled in political ethics, every branch 
of occult or mystic science, and all, too, for the same object— 
to accumulate wealth, and attain temporal distinction and 
power. These Jesuitical orders have ever been distinguished 
in all ages and nations for the unscrupulous means which they 
have employed to compass their ends. “One of them, ’tis 
said, in India, procured a pedigree to prove his own descent 
from Brahma ! and another, in America, assured a native chief 
that Christ had been a valiant and victorious warrior, who, in 
the space of three years, had scalped an incredible number of 
men, women and children.” ’Twas about the middle of the 
seventeenth century that these orders reached their point of 
culmination, and especially the Jesuitical, which eclipsed every 
other Romish community. But the great blow which they 
received, and which was the commencement of their declina¬ 
tion, was from the admirable pen of Pascal. The letters pro¬ 
vinciates 5 that great model of satire and eloquence, held them 
up to the merited contempt and detestation of mankind, and 
made their name a by-word and a reproach. 

Since the general abolition and suppression of their institu¬ 
tions in Europe, they have been, by the bulls of Popes and 
decrees of Princes and States, resuscitated and restored; and 
to-day their armies of priests, are the very sheet-anchors of 
their despotic thrones. Besides, they are pouring in ceaseless 
torrents into our own beloved country, muddying and poison¬ 
ing our pure streams of liberty, virtue, chastity, education and 
religion. They are establishing everywhere, convents, colle¬ 
ges, missions, hospitals, sisters of charity, and monasteries— 
nurseries of despotism, superstition, ignorance and bigotry— 
stews of sloth, stupidity, indolence and debauchery—where 
education is taught without the least tincture of useful, practi¬ 
cal learning—of good manners, or of true religion ; where the 
taste and sentiment of all the domestic and social relations are 
corrupted and vitiated ; where idle vagabonds resort, and noble 
industry is checked and discouraged. 

Yes, Americans, these are some of the appliances of that 
vitiating and despotic church, by which your glorious tree in¬ 
stitutions are being gradually undermined and subverted. 

The Confessional. This is the most despicable appendage 
of the Catholic church. It is here the cunning Priest becomes 
acquainted with ail the secret thoughts, feelings, passions and 




76 


sympathies of every member of his church, and thus, over all 
their minds and hearts, acquires complete mastery. In Mexico, 
Central and South America, in Spain, Portugal and other 
Catholic States of Europe, through their pretended power to 
remit sins, to grant indulgences, to bind and loose on earth 
and in heaven, innocent and infatuated maidens are seduced 
to “ take the veil ”—to become inmates of convents and nun¬ 
neries—to become holy victims of the Priests’ lawless desires. 
In the countries above mentioned, many of these secluded 
institutions have degenerated into consecrated harems: and 
even in portions of the United States, in them the most fla¬ 
grant and licentious acts have been perpetrated. It is notori¬ 
ous in New Mexico that Priests not only have two and three 
wives, but keep a seraglio of concubines adjoining their 
ehapeis. In Mexico, Cuba, South America, and the Catholic 
countries of Southern Europe, Priests will go immediately 
from Mass and witness bull and cock fights, to various gam¬ 
bling establishments, to various houses of ill-fame, and not only 
bet freely, but indulge in all sorts of excesses. ’Tis here, at 
the confessional, that the artful Priest makes slaves of freemen, 
with the promised beatitude of heaven, or the threatened fires 
of hell. What admirable mediators between God and man, 
these priestly tricksters. 

The doctrine of purgatory. This is another despotic device 
by which the Romish priesthood sway at will the minds of 
men. They say there are none who depart this life so just 
and pure that they must not expiate in purgatory certain of¬ 
fences which do not merit eternal damnation. They divide 
all sins into mortal and venial —the former damnable, the latter 
pardonable. But if you have money, all are pardonable, if 
not, all are mortal. Jesus Christ said, “ come unto me all ye 
that are weary and heavy laden, without money or price.” 
The Catholic Priest says, come unto me all that are weary and 
heavy laden with money , for I must have my price. It is the 
prayers and intercessions of the Priest alone that can release 
the soul from adamantine chains and penal fires; and these 
are given for money. But this fiction also is of Pagan origin. 
Among the Egyptians, the dread tribunal after death was a 
judicial institution, confined alone to the priesthood. By this 
tribunal they determined whether the dead bodies even of 
Kings, were worthy of anointing, embalming, and a sepulchre, 
or whether they should not be cast away for natural decay. 
If the former, the soul passed through a purgatorial state, 
called transmigration ; if the latter, then it was totally extinct. 
The doctrine of purgatory was common also among the Brah¬ 
mins of India. They believed that there were seven spheres 
below, and seven above the earth, in a descending and ascend¬ 
ing scale. In the highest of the ascending, was the celestial 


77 


residence of their great god, Brahma. All the sacred writings 
of the Brahmins represent the universe as an ample and au¬ 
gust theatre, for probationary souls in a purgatorial state, 
ever ascending the siderial ladder, through various gradations 
of toil and suffering, till they attained the pristine state of 
perfection and blessedness. This constitutes their doctrine of 
Metempsychosis. This doctrine was also common among the 
pagan votaries of Lamaisrn—the Jews, Mahommedans, the 
Pythagorean and Platonic sects. While this was a mere 
scholastic vagary among these sects, it was a cunning device 
upon the part ot these pagan Egyptians and Catholic Priests, 
to hoard pennies, and acquire despotic influence over the fears 
and hopes of superstitious and infatuated men. 

Image worship is also another Pagan feature of the Romish 
church. Was not the Catholic church charged with this idola¬ 
try in the eighth century, not only by the Greeks, Jews and 
Mohammedans, but by all the Christian Bishops of Constanti¬ 
nople and the East? There was a Synod held at Constanti¬ 
nople in the year A.D., 754, by three hundred and thirty-eight 
Bishops, in which they pronounced and subscribed a unani¬ 
mous decree: “ That all symbols of Christ, except in the 

Eucharist, were either blasphemous or heretical; that image 
worship was a revival of Paganism; that all such monuments 
should be broken and erased.” It is a historical fact, that 
when the Mahometans captured and sacked Constantinople, 
they destroyed all Catholic images and relics in their churches, 
calling them Pagans and Idolators. Six successive Emperors 
of the Roman Empire supported the reason and religion of the 
Iconoclasts, against the Bishops of Rome in their idolatrous 
worship of images. But, finally, the Popes of Rome prevailed. 
Pope Gregory II. appealed to arms against his sovereign and 
the Iconoclasts, and in his address to the Italians for aid, he 
used this argument: “ You Italians should not oppose image 
worship , because it is connected with your ancient, hereditary 
glory; because, in sustaining us you are supporting the religion 
of your ancestors.” The Catholics now contend, in the pictures 
of Christ, of the Holy Mother, of Angels, and the relics of 
Saints, that they do not adore them in themselves, but the per¬ 
sonages, and the qualities and attributes of character, which 
they impersonate and represent. Does any sensible man 
believe that the learned Egyptian worshipped the goat, mon¬ 
key, crocodile, as well as leeks and onions ? Does any one 
believe that the Romans and Greeks worshipped the statues ol 
their innumerable divinities, their heroes and demigods? Cer¬ 
tainly not; but the elements and qualities and properties 
represented and symbolized. Yet they are termed in “ Holy 
Writ” Pagans and Idolators; and, indeed, so are the Cat ho- 


78 


The adoration of relics, and the alleged miracles performed 
by them, and at the tombs of the saints, have led to the most 
abominable superstitions and knavery. At one time such was 
the rage to procure relics to adorn and consecrate churches in 
Europe, that they have actually succeeded in getting “ eight 
arms of St. Matthew, three of St. John, and an incredible 
number of St. Thomas A. Deckel—they have the ark and rod 
of Moses—the table on which the last supper of the Savior 
was instituted—on the altar of the Lateran are the heads of 
St. Paul and St. Peter entire—at St. Peter’s Church, is the 
cross of the penitent thief; also, the lantern of Judas—the 
dice used by the Roman soldiers who cast lots for our Savior’s 
garments—the tail of Balaam’s ass—the saw, axe and hammer 
of St. Joseph—the combs that the Apostles and the Virgin 
Mary used,” and an indefinite number of other tomfooleries . 
We will give you some idea of the miracles said to be per¬ 
formed at the tombs of the saints—also, by their relics and 
images, by stating one which has been publicly announced to 
the world. “An official publication, authorized by the Papal 
Court of Rome, declared that twenty-six pictures of the Virgin 
Mary opened and shut their eyes in 1796 and 1797, and a 
statue of the Virgin at Torrice changed color and perspired.” 
The doctrine of indulgences, of the seven sacraments, of tran- 
substantiation, of extreme unction, and sundry others, peculiar 
to the Romish church, are anti-Christian or Pagan in their 
origin, and are designed either to make a penny for the hypo¬ 
critical priesthood, or to stultify and degrade the masses of 
men. 

The doctrine of indulgences has led to the most extraordi¬ 
nary crimes and enormities. At one period in Europe, Popes 
manufactured indulgences by the wholesale, for vagabond 
monks and priests, who hawked them about everywhere for 
sale, graduating their prices to the ability of the purchasers. 
Those that would cost princes an hundred pounds, could be 
bought by a peasant for so many pennies. ’Tvvas these that 
most shocked the religious sense of the world, and aroused the 
spirit of the Reformation, whose trumpet-voice of religious 
liberty shook for years the thrones of Europe, and silenced 
the thunder-peals of the Vatican. 

The other appurtenances of the Romish church to which 
we have alluded, belong rather to polemic theology than to 
political philosophy; hence, we will not give them a critical 
examination. Civil and religious liberty are like two palm- 
trees, which bear ambrosial fruit only when growing side bv 
side. This remark introduces our third proposition, “ that 
the union of Church and State in the organism of govern¬ 
ments, has invariably led to the usurpation of the rights of the 
people—to national corruption, degradation and ruin.” 


79 


We have already discussed this subject in our previous arti¬ 
cles, and it is only necessary here to state our previous conclu¬ 
sion—that there never existed a nation in the ancient, nor is 
there one of the modern world, where any religion became 
either the dominant or established church, incorporated with 
the civil departments of the government, in which the church 
did not become the most potent and permanent auxiliary of 
despotic administration. If you wish to see the blighting 
effects of the Catholic church, as such, upon the morals, liber¬ 
ties and enlightenment of nations, compare in all the elements 
of national dignity and greatness, Mexico, Central and South 
America, with the United States; or Spain, Portugal, Italy 
and Austria, with Prussia, Scotland and England. How infi¬ 
nite the contrast! Roman Catholicism is as some dread comet 
upon the world let loose, “ that from its fiery hair shakes pes¬ 
tilence and death.” 

We have now arrived at the last topic of discussion, the 
political position of the American order with regard to all 
other parties. These are our positions : 

In the nomination of candidates we will advocate the se¬ 
lection of good men and true, of acknowledged integrity and 
talent, regardless of the Whig or Democratic predilections 
of the same. But in all cases they must be members of our 
organization. 

We will maintain and defend the Constitution as it stands, 
the Union as it exists, and the rights of the States as guaran¬ 
tied thereby. 

We will ignore the agitation of the slavery question, and 
discard its discussion as a Federal issue; as well ns all other 
questions of a sectional character, or of municipal regulation. 

Thus, have we finished the original thirteen articles which 
we proposed writing, in exposition and vindication of the 
principles and policy of the great American party, to which 
>ve dedicate them; believing, as we humbly do, that, in the 
hands of Providence, it is destined to snatch our beloved 
country from the terrible vortex to which foreignism and 
Roman Catholicism were hastening it with almost irresistible 
impetuosity. lam AN-AMERICAN. 


[Copyright secured according to law.] 










80 


® 033 239 176 8 

PLATFORM OF THE AMERICAN PARTY OF TENNESSEE. 


We believe that American Liberty is the richest inheritance ever committed 
to man, and, in proportion to its value, should be our vigilance and fidelity in its 
defense. We should guard, with a jealous eye, every assault upon its integrity, 
whether proceeding from faction within, or interference without. We would re¬ 
gard the slightest diminution of, or infringement upon this Liberty, as the greatest 
calamity that could befall the human family. We hold, that in its continued and 
ultimate triumph are involved the progress, the elevation and the happiness of the 
race. While it is eminently peculiar to Americans, it is yet the strongest bond 
between them and the remainder of mankind. The present generation of citizens 
and patriots will best show themselves worthy of this inheritance and of the glory 
won by their forefathers, by transmitting both undiminished and unimpaired to 
their posterity. For the purpose of preserving this sacred possession among our¬ 
selves, and, as far as we can, of securing its safety forever, we pledge ourselves 
to each other and to the country, to stand by the following declaration of our prin- , 
eiples and sentiments: 

Resolved, That we esteem it the highest duty of American citizens to promote 
the permanence and prosperity of their country; and that, with this view, they 
should defend the principles of American Republicanism proclaimed by our fathers 
of the Revolution of 1776, and embodied in the Constitution of the United States 

Resolved , That, while no obstacle should be interposed to the immigration ot 
honest and industrious foreigners, we will protest against the United States being 
made either a penal colony or a pauper establishment for the use of foreign nations; 
and we will, therefore, advocate the passage of such laws as will prevent the ship¬ 
ment to our shores of all foreign criminals and paupers, and demand of the govern¬ 
ments conniving at their shipment, immediate and ample satisfaction for the outrage. 

Resolved, That the suffrages of the American people for political offices, should 
not be given to any others than those born on our soil, and reared and nurtured 
under the influence of our institutions. 

Resolved, That no foreigner ought to be allowed to exercise the elective fran¬ 
chise till he shall have resided within the United States a sufficient length of time 
to enable him to become acquainted with the principles, and imbued with the 
spirit of our institutions, and until he shall have become thoroughly identified with 
the great interests of our country. 

Resolved , That we will maintain the vested rights of all persons, whether of 
native or foreign birth, and will, at all times, oppose the slightest interference 
with such rights. 

Resolved, That the intelligence and virtue of the people are necessary to tlie 
right use and continuance of our liberties, civil and religious ; hence, the propriety 
and importance of promoting and fostering all means of moral and intellectual 
culture by some adequate and permanent provision for general education. 

Resolved, That the Bible in the hands of every citizen is the only permanent 
basis of civil and religious liberty. 

Resolved, That we acknowledge the right of all men to worship God according 
to the dictates of their own conscience; that we will interfere in no wise, with 
private judgment on religious subjects; that we will oppose all union of Church 
and State, regardless of whatever sect or party may seek to bring about such 
union. 

Resolved, That we will maintain and defend the Constitution as it stands, the 
Union as it exists, and the Rights of the States, without diminution, as guaran¬ 
tied thereby; and we will oppose all who may assail them, or either of them. 

Resolved, That we recognise no law higher than the Constitution, and that the 
assumption of a right by any foreign Prince, Pope or Potentate to interfere with 
the affairs of our people, is at war with the peculiar liberty which we have justly 
denominated American. 

Resolved, That we will ignore the agitation of all questions, of whatever char¬ 
acter, based upon geographical distinctions or sectional interest. 

Resolved, That we will support those who maintain our doctrines, and oppose 
those who oppose our doctrines; and we will use our utmost exertions to build up 
an “American Party,” whose maxim shall be, AMERICANS SHALL GOVERN 
THEIR COUNTRY. 


